Revolution Horsepower Revealed

Revo writes "IGN.com unveiled leaked specs for Nintendo's upcoming Revolution console today. The system really is about twice as powerful as a GameCube and a far cry from the Xbox 360 and PS3. Of course, the focus is on the innovative controller and the affordable price."

Comments

Price Point

[Doytch]

Any more than $150 and it's price gouging with specs like that... How much does the Xbox with comparable specs cost now?

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

I love how you directly compare the horespower. All that's been released is the clockspeed of the processors.

As we all know, from the big AMD vs Intel war, clockspeed isn't everything. Also keep in mind, that IBM usually develops PPC chips - and PPC chips generally are faster per clock speed than PC chips.

Also keep in mind that the revolution won't need to fill a 1024i or whatever resolution - just a standard dvd resolution. So it doesn't need as much power to do the same quality of graphics (in terms of what it's rendering, not what resolution it's rendering at).

My prediction? The step between platform graphics is going to be similar to how the dreamcast fared last time around - ie, somewhere between the two generations of graphics. But also keep in mind that graphics aren't all the revolution is bringing to the table, meaning it probably won't fare the same as the dreamcast did.

Re:Price Point

[NETHED]

**Disclaimer: I am NOT a gamer. I enjoy simple D-pad+four button games.***

My view on this whole Sony/MSFT vs Nintendo war is that Nintendo is trying to be a console, while Sony/MSFT are trying to be full blown entertainment devices. And I think Nintendo has chosen the right niche. Personally, I don't see myself buying an XBox360, or PS3, but I do see myself buying a Revolution. Nintendo has openly said that it will have emulation ability, so that you can play your old games (ie super mario, etc) on the revolution. I see this as the killer app. If the revolution costs 100USD, I'll buy one, just to have the ability to play older nintendo games on my nice tv. I assume they will recompile or do some graphics magic to make it look good on a 16:9 set, and so this is a 'good thing'.

Nintendo has a HUGE library of very entertaining games, and if you look at the demographic, the people who played super mario and had the original NES and SNES are now in the position of making purchases, and they will buy the Revolution. I know that I don't have the time to sit down and play Halo, but I do have the time to sit down and poink around with Mario Cart, or even Contra. The reason those simple Atari games you see at walmart are selling is because people want simple games again.

I guess I'm getting old (I'm 23!!!) but games sure aren't what they use to be.

Re:Price Point

[a10waveracer]

Part of the problem with comparing the XBox and the Revolution prices is the fact that they are 2 completely different business models. While Microsoft is content with losing money on their hardware and gaining it back on software, I would presume Nintendo wouldn't have that same 'comfort zone' with their pricing. That being said, I would agree that the best price for this would be around $150... Maybe even $125...

Re:Price Point

[justchris]

Except the Xbox doesn't have comparable specs. The Xbox has comparable specs to the gamecube, and likely would be heavily inferior to the gamecube if the GC's CPU was fast enough to handle the GPU's output.

And considering that at least one controller will come with the system, and the development cost alone of that technology, your conclusion is fallacious.

Re:Price Point

[thatguywhoiam]

My view on this whole Sony/MSFT vs Nintendo war is that Nintendo is trying to be a console, while Sony/MSFT are trying to be full blown entertainment devices. And I think Nintendo has chosen the right niche. Personally, I don't see myself buying an XBox360, or PS3, but I do see myself buying a Revolution. Nintendo has openly said that it will have emulation ability, so that you can play your old games (ie super mario, etc) on the revolution. I see this as the killer app.

I think you are right about positioning, however I feel the need to point out - if backwards compatibility is your killer app, then you must bow to the PS3 in that department - it handles PS2 and PS1 games, which is probably the biggest single-platform games library in the world outside of PCs.

Unless of course this is about the plumber, in which case I will simply say good day and good luck with those mushrooms.

Re:Price Point

[Elfich47]

And as far as I know..... (I don't have the facts in front of me). Microsoft was having to sell 10-15 games per console to break even on the Xbox by the end (assuming they are making $10/game). So Microsoft may have lost money on every console they sold, even after the games were sold. On the flip side: Nintendo's consoles have always made money. The games are just gravy on top.

Re:Price Point

[mozumder]

If they can go with 90nm, this can sell for under a $100, at which point, I'm there. This shouldn't cost more than the gamecube. They might even be able to sell it for $80 if they can fab it in 65nm.

My guess is that they're planning a portable around it as well for the 45nm generation.

Re:Price Point

[L0k11]

heh, parent is right. I will be 23 and I will buy a revolution (like i bought an "ultra 64") simply to play some old favourites. Unfortunately for sony the back catalogue is essentially useless - the games I want to play are the quality nintendo/rare games including SMB, donkey kong country, diddy kong racing, goldeneye (will the extra grunt improve the frame rates in grenade launcher battles?) hell even games like blast corps were great.

/fanboy i guess

Yeah this is definately about the plumber... oh and that remote thingy...

Re:Price Point

[blueflash2o]

you must bow to the PS3 in that department - it handles PS2 and PS1 games, which is probably the biggest single-platform games library in the world outside of PCs.

the revolution will nes snes n64 gameboy original and color virtual boy and they justgot deals with sega for there old games and there are some others i am missing oh and the game cube. i think the revolution wins in this regard. plus it will be on nintendo's wifi network that the ds uses right now.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

If the revolution costs 100USD

It will eventually get there, but plan on waiting a few years for it to drop that much. Me, I plan on buying one on launch day. It will be the first time I'm making that type of purchase.

And dammit, 23 isn't old. That's my age and I'm not old!

Re:Price Point

[TrancePhreak]

I assume they will recompile or do some graphics magic to make it look good on a 16:9 set

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Nintendo has said that their system will not support HD. This includes 16:9 mode. There will be no component cables for the Revolution. It's weird because the GameCube had them, so it's a step back. With no 480p, all of those games with on/off flashing for 1 frame will look really terrible interlieved on a progressive display. I know because PS2 games still do it, and it looks ugly. Smash Bros. Melee does it too, and it was ugly (Thankfully it has a 480p mode).

MS and Sony realise that simple games are selling too. This is part of why MS setup Live Arcade, and why the games there are cheap. Sony has yet to reveil anything more than a "me too!" statement.

Re:Price Point

[Chandler55]

I agree I loved the 2d era simply because it was much simpler and when you died you could only blame yourself. In 3d games like splinter cell and metal gear solid, when you see bullets shooting at you off the screen it doesnt feel as fair as falling into a spiked pit in megaman.

Re:Price Point

[Bladestorm]

480p is not HD. Besides, Nintendo already said they will support 480p but no higher.

Re:Price Point

[PixelScuba]

I guess I'm getting old (I'm 23!!!) but games sure aren't what they use to be.

When I was your age we had to walk buck naked through 40 miles of snow... had to sell my internal organs to pay the rent.. blah blah and you never heard us complain. I hear this so often I'm frankly tired of it. Of COURSE games aren't what they used to be, and quite frankly, I would have stopped playing games a decade ago if they were. Arguably, I think most games are better today than they were years ago. Sure we get some real trash released, and more of it than decades ago, but there are far more great games released today than years ago as well. When I had to tollerate garbage like Hydlide on the NES, I can pallette crappy games today. Stories, art direction, sound design, beta testing, translations... this type of stuff was hardly implemented in games years ago "Help Blocky Man grab stuff on a level, fight boss and go to next level and repeat. Get a High Score!"

Sure they are plenty of negative trends today in the game industry, but I'll argue that that game design is of a higher caliber today than it was many years ago.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

"Also keep in mind that the revolution won't need to fill a 1024i or whatever resolution - just a standard dvd resolution. So it doesn't need as much power to do the same quality of graphics (in terms of what it's rendering, not what resolution it's rendering at)."

Actually, it will require more power to render the same scene as on an Xbox 360 or PS3, it just doesn't need as high of a fillrate due to the lower resolution.

Re:Price Point

[Khuffie]

I just turned 22. You 23 year olds are damned ancient by my standards.

Re:Price Point

[Telvin_3d]

It is easy to say that Sony's library is the biggest, but what does that mean when the games are not available to play? Let's say that you want to make use of that library, is Sony making all those games available online? Is there anywhere you can buy even a fraction of Sony's catalogue? And when I say buy, I mean go out and find a specific title that you remember fondly, not hunt through a bargain bin for some random junk.

The whole Sony catalogue is a false argument. Yes, it is compatible, but no, it is not available. Nintendo is making a huge chunk of their legacy library available for the Revolution, and that is a whole other thing.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

All that's been released is the clockspeed of the processors.

And the fact that the architectures are identical to the Gamecube ones. That means the CPU is basically a 730MHz Gecko and the GPU is a 240 MHz Flipper. The per clock performance of the Gecko chip (which is basically a G3 with integrated cache and the ability to use its 64-bit FPU as a 2x32-bit SIMD engine) is probably quite a bit better than the Xenon, but enough to make up for the enormous clockspeed difference.

The G3 is a very ancient chip. It has almost no OOO capability. Per-clock, its probably going to be faster than Cell, but considering that the per-clock of the PIII-based core in the XBox is in line with the G4, it won't match up even to the older console in CPU performance. As for graphics chips --- clockspeed times the number of pipelines is an excellent predictor of GPU performance. Only in a relatively small number of cases (eg: the Geforce FX debacle for NVIDIA), has pure fill-rate proved to be a poor predictor of overall performance in the case of conventional GPUs. The integrated memory helps the Flipper chip quite a bit, but given that it h as about the same clock-rate and the same number of pipelines as the XBox GPU, I wouldn't expect much more than that level of performance out of it. Overall, expect the Revolution to perform somewhat like a slightly improved XBox. Between the 1T-SRAM and the familiarity of developers with the GC architecture, Revolution developers should be able to wring substantially more out of the Revolution than they did out of the XBox, but I'd be surprised if the improvement was more than 50%.

Re:Price Point

[SeeMyNuts!]

"Microsoft was having to sell 10-15 games per console to break even on the Xbox by the end"

That's not a few games, that's a gaming library! Just how many people have mommy and daddy buying them games every month year after year? Isn't that a bit too much gaming?

Re:Price Point

[arose]

And an Athlon XP is just an i386 with 2 GHz clock speed?

Re:Price Point

[psxman]

Rare isn't supporting the VC, so no Goldeneye or either of the listed DK games. SMB's good, though.

Re:Price Point

[k_187]

that and having 7000 games to play doesn't mean much if only 150 of them are worth playing

Re:Price Point

[QuantumLeaper]

Some Rare game won't be making it, at least thats their current statement. The ones with Nintendo characters will most likely be available, but the other like Goldeneye won't be available.

Re:Price Point

[wmacgyver]

Sony is going to make at least part of their catalog avaiable online both for PS3 and PSP. Thus the argument is valid. Sony discussed such a service here at GDC.

Re:Price Point

[flimflammer]

*That* my friend is up to interpretation. I'm sure out of 7000 games, I could find more than 150 games that I found enjoyable. I could openly up and say right now that out of the whole PS1/PS2 collection of games that were ever sold, only 10-15 perked my interest from what I've played, and I've played a lot of them (it helps when your friend is a rich SOB who basicly bought every game he could get his hands on). That must mean, that there were only 10-15 games worth playing, period--or does it?

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

PS2 and PS1 games, which is probably the biggest single-platform games library in the world outside of PCs.

That's fanboy-BS. And you know it. You can play 20 years of Nintendo on that $100 console. Most of the games are incredible entertaining. Oh, BTW... PS2 and PS1 are not a "single-platform". A small fault which shows that you made this entirely up.

Unless of course this is about the plumber, in which case I will simply say good day and good luck with those mushrooms.

If you don't like plumbers and mushrooms, that's ok. You're already childish enough.

Re:Price Point

[lysergic.acid]

clockspeed isn't everything

yea, that's what all guys with a low clockspeeds say.

Re:Price Point

[kerrle]

Actually, it'll still have the DK games. The only Rare games that won't show up are for properties Rare actually owns, like Killer Instinct and Perfect Dark.

So, while I admit the loss of Killer Instinct is a blow, the DK games are safe, as they're Nintendo properties.

Re:Price Point

[Zangief]

And they will be charging for that library. Which means $$$. Which also means that Sony will be competing against the discount bins of PS1/PS2 games.

The Revolution will only provide backwards compatibility with one console: the Gamecube.

Of course, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will end up selling digital content.

Re:Price Point

[aichpvee]

Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing. Though my number was 99$. Unless they pack in a game and/or give us two controllers, either of which would be a really good move on Nintendo's part.

Re:Price Point

[spysmily1]

"I think you are right about positioning, however I feel the need to point out - if backwards compatibility is your killer app, then you must bow to the PS3 in that department - it handles PS2 and PS1 games, which is probably the biggest single-platform games library in the world outside of PCs." If you had quoted his whole sentence instead of just a portion like an irresponsible poster, his context for single platform refers to the PS3 not the PS1 and PS2. The PS3 is a SINGLE PLATFORM that would support all those games. To call someone "childish enough" and not have gotten their own facts straight plus the addition of posting as anonymous while the parent poster did use a name is immature in itself.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it does. 90% of everything is crap, and I'd say the number increases with the age of the game (there are a LOT of NES games, I have hundreds of ROMs and only care about playing a handful).

However, adding, say 50 good games via backwards compatibility roughly doubles the number of good games on the system, because 90% of the new stuff is pointless shit too. There aren't 50 gamecube games I want to play, probably only 30. The PS2 has 50, maybe 60, including some also on the cube, and maybe 20 PS1 games. Add 50 good old skool Nintendo games to that and you've significantly improved the library of either platform.

Re:Price Point

[JAppi]

There will be no component cables for the Revolution. It's weird because the GameCube had them Actually, only the earlier models had Component support. Any of the GameCubes for sale right now do not have the component output. Apparently no one used it so they got rid of it to cut costs.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

The one you're missing is Hudson, which bring TurboGraphx (and reportedly TurboDuo as well?).

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

ok...ok... but you won't make me subscribe here!

Re:Price Point

[Zantetsuken]

if you think about the statement - its clock speeds between intel and amd chips - amd chips tend to round off around 2.2 or 2.4 ghz, and perform better than intel's supposed 3 ghz p4s

Re:Price Point

[lysergic.acid]

I don't follow hardware much anymore so I'll take your word on that one. But the difference in clockspeeds between the revolution and other next gen. consoles is much larger: 729MHz compared to 3 cores at 3.2GHz. Assuming that the technology is even remotely comparable, that gap represents a significant difference in Nintendo's strategy, if only that they aren't touting hardware figures such as clockspeed and memory as the reason to buy the revolution--which I think was the author's point.

Re:Price Point

[indil]

This includes 16:9 mode.

Actually, Revolution will be quite capable of 16:9, as is the current GameCube hardware:

Matt responds: Certainly the capability for progressive-scan and 16:9 widescreen games will be there on Revolution. You can do that on GameCube now.

Source

Re:Price Point

[somersault]

"Help Blocky Man grab stuff on a level, fight boss and go to next level and repeat."

While some games back then had predefined levels etc, I'm sure a lot of the games actually had more replay value (and just plain addictiveness) than todays games with 'stories' and 'art direction' etc =p I remember a Space simulator on a BBC Micro at school, it did have levels etc, and I never got very far, but I think the universe was randomised (yeah, pretty easy to do with a space game but nevertheless). Wish I knew what it was called. There are soom good games out these days, but most new games just pass me by now, all pretty much ripoffs of other 'good' games I've already played..

I tried getting into RPGs a little recently, and while they have potential, there needs to be more of a need for skill in those types of games, rather than just time investment - for example on any MMORGP if you spend enough time with your character he's likely to get pretty kickass (not that I've played any MMORGPs 'cept MUDs :p ).. RPGs havent really changed since whenever they were brought out =p and most other games havent actually either - the only real differences come from 3D graphics (old games still required skill, sometimes more than current games, sometimes less).

I think when you try 'too hard' with doing a story and graphics etc then you risk losing the actual fun gameplay experience, and are just making a semi-interactive TV show. Even if you have a few different endings or splitting points in your story, eventually you'll get bored replaying it unless the actual act of playing the game is fun. The GTA series is a great example of a game that is still great fun to play even after you've completed it, just because it's so free roaming and it fits a lot of fun elements in like driving, hand to hand combat, armed combat, etc :p Hmm I need to stop reminiscing and get to work.

Re:Price Point

[VJ42]

Unless of course this is about the plumber, in which case I will simply say good day and good luck with those mushrooms.

It's not just about the plumber, the blue hedgehog is making his way onto the revolution as well; I always used to love Sega consoles because of him; a large chunk of the Sega back cvataloge is going to be on the revolution as well. They just need to get some Atari games (like they have with the DS) on board and I'm sold.

Re:Price Point

[Xymor]

PsOne has 7153 games, 5000+ being japanese. Ps2 has about 5200 titles. So you're So you should count how many games are worth playing out of 13000+ ps2+ps1 titles. How many games have you played?

Re:Price Point

[KDR_11k]

We're not expecting you to subscribe, just to get an account. Subscribing costs money, an account doesn't.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

Also keep in mind, that IBM usually develops PPC chips - and PPC chips generally are faster per clock speed than PC chips.

That must be why the Intel Macs are now three times faster than the PPC Macs used to be...

Re:Price Point

[gormanly]

Exactly. As another example, there is a little known computer based on a 700 MHz PowerPC chip, the PowerPC 440, which seems to perform quite well ...

Re:Price Point

[LnxAddct]

I know you were joking around, but some people will not understand that. The 1.2Ghz UltraSPARC in the Sun T2000 has recently set a few world records for performance, outperforming 4 dual core Xeons. It is a multi-cored chip, but that is only one reason why it performs so well. Anyone who has taken any hardware architecutre course quickly learns that clock speed is just about meaningless, in fact if you only increase clock speed and don't change anything else, you'll typically see higher percentages of your processing time being used to handle hazards and other nonsense. Another example is the Pentium M, which often runs at under half the clock cycle of the P4, but leaves the P4 in its dust for just about every benchmark. A high clock cycle amounts to nothing but outrageous amounts of heat and energy when you can be processing the data faster and more efficiently as Intel has learned in recent years. The Mhz myth needs to end.

What's even better for Nintendo is that these chips are custom built for Nintendo's needs, and a chip designed for a purpose always performs very well against generic processors (even if the generic processor is supposed to be several times faster). I mean noone would expect their P4 to match up against any modern Nvidia or ATI GPU for graphics performance, thats just how it is. Nintendo also knows how to squeeze performance out of its hardware (i.e. the often cited Resident Evil 4, if I can get graphics twice as good as that on this new console, then really Sony and Microsoft will have nothing to stand on). The cell processor doesn't even have a good compiler yet, and its developers don't know how to effectively use its resources, same thing goes for the XBox (but not to as bad of an extent). By the time the XBox and PS3 are being effectively used, it'll be time for the 4th gen consoles. I am betting that Revolution will be capable of graphics on par if not better than PS3's release titles.

And as a final point, this is only a dev box we are talking about and not final production specs, so the whole argument is pointless.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Price Point

[oliderid]

Exactly my thought.

I will never buy a console at $400 or more. I'm 30 years old, I play once a week or less. games are usually 4-8 hours long, I buy around 4 games per year, they cost $75 each (if not more). So Xbox made a turnover of -/+ $1500 with me. It looks like that's not enough for them. It will be more With the Xbox 360 and PS3 (I expect a budget of $1800 or more for 4 years with games only, a lot more if I start to play with their video on demand). Too expensive.

This is getting insane. This is precisly why I left PC games, I was tired to discover that after 6 months my configuration was obsolete. (investment in hardware: $600 per year + new games).

If Nitendo provides a console at $100 or more (up to $200), I may consider buying one.

I don't need a super/hyper/ultra video card, with a hyper CPU and Giga RAM. All I need is a device to play entertaining games occasionally. I won't have this new rendering things? Who cares...I'm old enough to know that I just have to wait to get it at a decent price.

I don't need Sony/MS multimedia centre either. What's the point? They will push DRM formats, you will "force" to buy everything for every single device you own. I want to be able to record the things I've paid for, put them on a DVD or a HD, copy them, backup them and play on any of my devices. Period.

Sony and MS will never provide such a thing. I will look elsewhere to get it.

Olivier

Re:Price Point

[gormanly]

Actually, it was 7,743 PS1 and 5,277 PS2 games at the end of March 2005, and Sony will publish this year's figures soonish. To be really pedantic, only 4,907 of those PS1 games were Asian (not just Japanese) releases.

To round out the numbers seeing as how we're on that track, there were 3,181 PS2 Asian releases by this time last year, versus 1,121 (and 1,501 PS1 titles) in the Europe, Middle East and Africa region; and 975* and 1,335 in North America.

*Irritatingly, one of those is Katamari Damarcy

Re:Price Point

[ThePhilips]

Intel v. AMD???

I have had funniest experience with Intel itself.

P4 v. Pentium Dual Core: one core at 2.2GHz beats 3.5GHz P4.

P4 v. Pentium M/Centrino: at several benchmarks the notebook chip at 1.5GHz had beaten by 2 times 3.2GHz P4

If you have ever programmed in assembler and read even single spec for CPU and code optimization (Intel has good tradition of releasing such specs) you would definitely know that clock speed itself has only modest influence on overall performance. (To put it simply: exec'ing user's code isn't only task CPU is doing - all communication with peripherals goes thru CPU too. CPU normally do about 30-70% of their peek performance: interrupt latencies, memory latencies, bus access latencies, etc.)

Read on: older http://www.intel.com/design/pentium/manuals/ & newer http://www.intel.com/design/pentium4/manuals/index _new.htm

Re:Price Point

[dlZ]

I guess I'm getting old (I'm 23!!!) but games sure aren't what they use to be.

I would really think that the release of classic NES titles would even be a better draw for people that were really old enough in 1986 (when the NES had a US nationwide release) to have had one. I know I had one when they first came out. And 23 is not old. I'm 27, so you'd be making me ancient by those standards!

I do plan on getting one after awhile, though. But then, I said that about the Gamecube, and still haven't picked that up yet.

Re:Price Point

[Illbay]

Nintendo has openly said that it will have emulation ability, so that you can play your old games (ie super mario, etc) on the revolution. I see this as the killer app.

I think you nailed it.

While I was reading the first few posts I thought "man, can you imagine not only buying a NEW game system every couple of years in your pursuit of the latest Big Thing, but having to discard all your old game (ah, they were so 2007 anyway) and buy new?"

I mean, the software ain't cheap, and likely represents a bigger outlay than the system itself, for those who are "really into games."

Re:Price Point

[az_bont]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Nintendo has said that their system will not support HD. This includes 16:9 mode.

Adding a 16:9 mode to a game requires no extra hardware. All that happens is the game is rendered all squished-in, so that when it is stretched out by the Widescreen display, it is in the proper aspect ratio. The advantage of this over simply adding borders to the image (letterboxing) is that you are utilizing the full vertical resolution, rather than just 75% of it.

I've got a handful of original Playstation games that do this (Micro Maniacs, Worms Armageddon, Worms World Party are a few that spring to mind) - despite the fact that the Playstation was not at all designed with Widescreen gaming in mind.

Re:Price Point

[NekoXP]

The thing here being that Nintendo probably only plan to release those 150 games.

Nintendo don't HAVE access to a large back catalogue of games. Other people own them; other games companies. They can negotiate to release them but seriously, we are gonna get the Mario games (I hope Mario Allstars ones and not the NES ones) and the original Nintendo classics and a bunch that Nintendo have vied for, but not much else.

We are certainly not getting the whole 7000-title swathe ever released on any Nintendo console ready to buy. They will cherry pick the popular ones.

Unfortunately this means we will miss out on Blast Corps, and possibly Goldeneye/Perfect Dark, because Nintendo own them. But who gives a shit if they don't offer Battletoads?

Re:Price Point

[xSauronx]

i wotn be 23 until april and hes right, you senile fuckers!

as for me, i just bought a gamecube for christmas, because i wanted a console (where i usually dont like them) and it was cheap. ill probably upgrade my pc at the end of the summer, get oblivion and a few other titles and be happy with it for a couple of years, and *hopefully* dpending on the price of the revolution when it comes out, pick one up when its released.

Re:Price Point

[PsychoSid]

The game you are referring to is Elite I believe and IMHO one of the best games ever produced. In 32k of RAM. Which is the most anyone should need frankly !

Re:Price Point

[Professor_UNIX]

I buy around 4 games per year, they cost $75 each (if not more).

If you're paying $75 for games you're on some serious crack. Go to a Gamestop and pick out some used games. I bought 5 games for $35 around Christmas time. It's not like they wear out, they're CD/DVD media these days and not the awful "blow on them and pray your NES reads them" cartridges. If they're scratched or unreadable they take them back.

Re:Price Point

[James_Duncan8181]

Is the space simulator Elite? Screenshot. If so, hand in your geek card now for not knowing the name. ;)

Re:Price Point

[somersault]

lmao no, not elite, something much simpler and 2D only.. it was basically just a copy of the original enterprise viewed from above, and there were klingon bird-of-prey-alikes .. the game itself was probably very simple, but just great fun, and maybe it had more scope than I realise (just like Angband has much more scope than I realised when I used to play Moria as a kid, and kept getting killed on the 1st dungeon level).

But yes - we need more games like Elite - I remember seeing a demo for Elite: Frontier on my A500, it really kicked ass - being able to fly to different solar systems, land on the planets in 3D (or were they just scripted sequences?). I tried X2, and X3 is out now, but you still can't land on planets in them.. I appreciate it would take a lot of coding effort - but imagine a game combining GTA3 level of detail/gameplay on a planet, in a space sim. GTA3 doesnt actually keep track of much more than the cars around you (even when you use the 'look behind' option things can disappear from in front of you, heh), but with a little more careful planning (so that you always appear to be in a planet where the computer is actually tracking every inhabitant, but in reality the characters are all just randomly generated a couple of blocks away), and some good code for randomising land masses, cities etc, we could have games where you can fly between solar systems, land on a planet, get a job as a taxi driver, etc.. heh.. wonder how long it will be before games get to that level of integration.. and do it well.

Re:Price Point

[somersault]

as you can see by my other comment, I've known about Elite since my Amiga days, I didnt ever play it, though was quite into Wing Commander for a while, heh. Not quite the same level of sophistication, but I guess I wasn't either back then =p

Re:Price Point

[lysergic.acid]

Personally, I think that nintendo's approach has always been an emphasis on game design rather than technological superiority. They're more creative with their game designs so they don't need to rely heavily on photo-realistic graphics or bleeding-edge video hardware to compete with the other consoles. So in my opinion the reason for the lower clockspeeds probably has less to do with the ingeniousness of IBM and ATI chip architecture, and more to do with where Nintendo would rather put its energy--in the design of the games themselves.

And I think trying to argue that the revolution is going to be as powerful or more powerful than the ps3 or 360, in terms of hardware, is a bit of a moot point. Clockspeed might not always reflect the performance of a system, but you can't say that it isn't a factor or indicator. Why else would CPU manufacturers continue to increase the clockspeed of their processors? In the case of Intel vs. AMD, if you look at the processors with similar architectures (same number of cores, equal amount of cache, etc.), AMD CPUs and Intel CPUs with comparable performance will not have clockspeed differences of more than 20-30% As it stands, the 360's clockspeed is more than 4x the revolution's and it also boasts 2 more cores. The 360 also has more than 6 times the memory as the revolution. Unless you're talking about a completely different generation of technology, or atleast technology made by companies with totally disparate engineering capabilities, those numbers should still tell you that nintendo isn't aiming to deliver the most powerful of the next-gen consoles. And all 3 consoles have custom-made, specialized components. We're not comparing PDA CPUs with videocard GPUs here.

Frankly, these specs are in line with the gamecube's relative hardware performance in the previous generation consoles. Nintendo has done well by focusing on the games, not the raw processing power of their hardware. There's no need in trying to argue how nintendo's contender in the next gen console wars could still be the hardware powerhouse despite the numbers published. That isn't their strategy. The DS has less processing power than the PSP, but it's still much more successful. Nintendo doesn't need to be the top contender in every single aspect of the gaming platform, so there's no need making tenuous arguments to try to "defend" them here. If you feel that you need to, then you're missing the point.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

He's probably from Canada. It's not uncommon to pay $75 here after tax.

Re:Price Point

[twistedsymphony]

Don't be surprised if Goldeneye and Killer instinct show up as downloads in the Xbox Live Marketplace. I wouldn't compare Nintendo's BC service to Sony's BC feature. While sony claims to be able to deliver their classic titles through their network. CD sized PS1 games and DVD sized PS2 games would take a while to actually deliver, and waste otherwise valuable storage space. MS doesn't have much of a back catalog in comparison but they do seem to be gaining a lot of 3rd party support for the Live Arcade (particularly new indy devs). Acquired companies like Rare offer a lot in terms of what they could potentially provide in that department. I think Nintendo's biggest competition in that arena isn't Sony but the XBL Arcade.

As for price point, if Nintendo keeps in tune with their past console pricing it will launch at $199USD.AFAIK every console they've ever had has launched at $199 in the US. ...and that's definitely cheap enough for me to consider picking one up...

Re:Price Point

[gEvil (beta)]

Sounds like you might've missed the announcement last week that the Revolution will also have Sega Genesis and TurboGrafx16 games available on it.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

There will be no component cables for the Revolution.

That is a lie (stated with such authority for some reason). 480p display requires no less than component cables, since s-video and lower do not support the required video bandwidth. Revolution supports 480p. So...

Re:Price Point

[mausmalone]

I know that with the specs released, it would be entirely possible for Nintendo to get a lot out of it. But I still don't believe them. One thing made me stop believing the story all on its own:

Revolution's ATI-provided "Hollywood" GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube's GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz. Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders, as has been speculated.

My problem? No shaders. I find it absolutely absurd that Nintendo and ATi would team up and make a GPU that refuses to adopt now 4-year-old common-practice technology. Unless they want to make the system incredibly difficult to port to, I highly doubt they'd do something like that. I understand that it being slower isn't necessarily bad, since it only has to render at 640x480 instead of 1280x720, but not having any vertex or pixel shaders simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

I know that it seems like it would be easy to believe that the Revolution would be just a suped up gamecube, but do you seriously think that they'd even bother manufacturing a CPU below 1GHz at this point? The difference in price between 750 MHz and 1 GHz in this day and age has got to be microscopic, and it really wouldn't be worth cripling the system that much.

Re:Price Point

[fbjon]

The game you are thinking about was "the game that invented the space trading genre": Elite. It was highly popular on several platforms, and the sequels were nice too, though buggy.

Re:Price Point

[amliebsch]

Yeah, and I used to think that way about the back catalogs too. But then I loaded up the emulators on my Xbox, and lo and behold, most of those games were far crappier than I remember. Mario World was still fun, mostly, but I'd already played it through several times in the past and can't bring myself to want to do it again. And Tetris is still addicting. But for me, the nostalgia bubble burst pretty quickly, and I usually end up playing Super Mario War (an open-source game for the Xbox) when people come over while the old ROMS go unplayed.

Re:Price Point

[Jerim]

Having taken a hardware architecture course, I understand that increasing clock speed does not mean an effective use of processing speed. You are correct.

It is often the instruction set of a CPU that makes the difference, especially if they introduce ways to more efficiently process.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

>Also keep in mind that the revolution won't need to fill a 1024i or whatever resolution - just a standard dvd resolution. So it doesn't need as much power to do the same quality of graphics (in terms of what it's rendering, not what resolution it's rendering at).

If the Revolution is twice as powerful as a GameCube and can display DVD-resolution graphics, I'll be MORE than happy!

What I'm hoping for is mendatory widescreen support for ALL games.

Re:Price Point

[somersault]

was elite even available on the BBC Micro? The one I'm thinking of was actually a 2D game, more similar to Escape Velocity (http://www.ambrosiasw.com/games/evn/ is the sequel) (which I also thought was a great game, and I guess could be better than the one I'm thinking of through my rose-tinted spectacles).

Re:Price Point

[dlZ]

I'm the same way a lot of times, but I do enjoy the old games every so often. I have quite a few emulators, and mostly play Mario 3. I actually have an old NES hooked up right now, and the only game I play is Punch Out. It had been so many years since I had played it last that I found it provided a challenge again.

One thing I really do like about older games is with a lot of them, I can just sit down and play for a little bit. I don't have time to emerge myself into complex games anymore, I end up mostly playing racing games or Super Monkey Ball on the X-Box with the little time I do get to game. And Monkey Ball is so great as a party game, I haven't even played single player yet.

Re:Price Point

[KDR_11k]

Not just that. The MHz numbers make no sense either, I don't think going for an integer multiple of the GC's specs there would have cost much and it'd make cycle-perfect execution of GC games easier. The DS's ARM7 CPU that plays the GBA games has exactly 2x the clock frequency of the GBA.

Re:Price Point

[Headcase88]

"It's not just about the plumber, the blue hedgehog is making his way onto the revolution as well"

Yeah, those Sony and Microsoft fanboys are really missing out.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

My problem? No shaders. I find it absolutely absurd that Nintendo and ATi would team up and make a GPU that refuses to adopt now 4-year-old common-practice technology. Unless they want to make the system incredibly difficult to port to, I highly doubt they'd do something like that.

Since when do people buy Nintendo consoles for games that need to be ported from other platforms.

Re:Price Point

[somersault]

I searched around some BBC Micro sites and found out that this is the game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Command heh, it sounds very simple, but I remember it being rather good (and by the time I'd played it, I'd also been playing stuff like Mortal Kombat/Wing Commander and the like for years) :)

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you asked:

GameCube - $100 (console or bundle)
PS2 - $150
Xbox - $150 (console) - $180 (bundle)
Revolution - $200 (console)
Xbox 360 - $300 (base console) - $400 (console with accessories)
PS3 - $400 (unknown configuration)

I have a Revolution system pre-ordered to be picked up on the morning of whenever launch day is.

I am also contemplating buying a PS3 in several years, after the inevitable, Sony-typical, multiple hardware revisions have shaken out the bugs that will be shipped with the first few million systems sold. This should allow for at least 2-3 price drops on the hardware as well. Otherwise, I would be comfortable never buying one if the hardware stays buggy or the price stays high.

Do you see it? I don't care about the specs. I care that Nintendo's value proposition is very, very high. The brand new controller interface, the exclusive next-gen Nintendo software, the Virtual Console, the GameCube compatibility, and the low price are enough to get me to buy the system. When third-parties release their unique games for it, I will buy them too.

Sony's plan with PS3 is that they're going to attack the high end. Problem is, Sony has proven over the past ten years that their QA is not up to the task of doing this on a large scale at any price. Therefore their value proposition is comparably many times weaker than Nintendo's. Sony does not become an option until prices drop to levels that match the reliability of their hardware, regardless of specs. After all, a broken wonderwidget is a useless wonderwidget, no matter how much you spent on it. With Sony, hopefully you didn't spend full price on unreliable launch hardware.

Re:Price Point

[KDR_11k]

So you get that number by counting all titles for each region they were released in?

Re:Price Point

[Wdomburg]

Keep in mind that the cores in the Xenon (the XBox 360 CPU) are very very simple - single order execution, limited number of execution units, only 64k L1 cache per CPU, and only 1024k shared between all three cores. In other words, designed to clock high to compensate for relatively low per clock throughput. Puts me in mind of the design philosophy of Intel's NetBurst architecture in the P4.

There's speculation that Broadway will be dual core, which would make a huge difference, and rumour has it it'll feature 2MB of L2.

Re:Price Point

[j.bellone]

No it says, no added shaders which it is referring to additional shaders from the Flipper GPU (Gamecube). Essentially from what they're saying the new GPU has more onboard RAM and a higher clock speed but no additional shader pipelines.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

"though was quite into Wing Commander for a while, heh."

heh!!!

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

And the fact that the architectures are identical to the Gamecube ones

Actually, there is little or no information which actually points to this at all; the fact that Gamecube games run on the Revolution hardware only implies that the Gamecube's instruction set is a subset of the Revolution's instruction set. Think about it this way, take a Pentium M, Celeron and Pentum 4 processor all running at the exact same clockspeed (say 2GHz) do they all have identical performance? No, it will turn out Celeron Performance Pentium 4 Performance Pentium M performance.

What people need to remember is this is just a rumor that deals with benchmarks that are meaningless.

Re:Price Point

[NekoXP]

Nope.

But they are not going to have *EVERY* Sega Genesis game on it.

You're gonna get Sonic in every incarnation, a bunch of real Sega classics. A lot of *SEGA* games.

Not a 4000-title Genesis library encompassing every damn game, old, new, rare or popular.

Just (maybe) 50 or so really good ones. I would be surprised, for example, if you ever got to play
Zero Wing on Revolution ;)

Re:Price Point

[metamatic]

Is there anywhere you can buy even a fraction of Sony's catalogue? And when I say buy, I mean go out and find a specific title that you remember fondly, not hunt through a bargain bin for some random junk.

There's this web site called eBay. If you go there and search, you'll find you can pick up thousands of PS1 titles for very little cash.

Re:Price Point

[EmperorKagato]

Different Structure different performance. The architecture of a Workstation is different than the architecture of a Video Gaming Console.

And i'm not referring only to the Central Processing Unit.

Re:Price Point

[cduffy]

$35 each, or $35? In the latter case, you got a decent deal.

I typically pay about $7-$9 per (not always used) title at Half Price Books.

Re:Price Point

[fbjon]

Ah, well Elite was released first on the BBC Micro actually, IIRC. It's usually the game I think of whenever anyone says "that cool space game from the olden times (or thereabout)".

Re:Price Point

[sootman]

**Disclaimer: I am NOT a gamer. I enjoy simple D-pad+four button games.***

Four buttons==simple?!?!? In my day, we had a two-way controller with ONE button and we liked it, dag nabbit!

Re:Price Point

[gabebear]

It would be trivial to design the system to underclock the CPU by 50% rather than 100%, and I'm sure that's what they are planning on doing(485Mhz * 150% = 729Mhz). Clock multipliers are easily adjusted these days.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

The article says that the Revolution hardware is just updated versions of the Gamecube hardware. It looks like Nintendo did little or no redesign of the components, other than perhaps a die-shrink that allowed for higher-clockspeeds and lower cost. Consider, for example, the 3MB of memory integrated on the Flipper chip. It would've been quite easy to expand this to something larger if Nintendo was already overhauling the GPU, but the fact that its the exact same suggests that Flipper is more or less unchanged. Also consider the split memory architecture. You think that if Nintendo was just going to put 88MB of 1T-SRAM in the machine, they wouldn't bother splitting it up like that (the original split in the GC was because the secondary memory was of a different, cheaper, type). Since they didn't, that indicates they're keeping the same memory architecture as the GC, suggesting that they haven't updated the supporting chipset much if at all.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

No, but a 2 GHz Athlon XP is just a 1.5 GHz Athlon XP with a 2 GHz clockspeed. Read the article more carefully --- the Revolution chips are not new designs. They're warmed-over versions of the Gamecube chips.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

That's an idiotic reference. The 440-based machines perform well because there are tens of thousands of them hooked up to interconnects that cost more than your house. Each chip itself is a fairly slow, low-power design. The Revolution includes only a single chip, and it appears that even this isn't a newer 440, but a faster-clocked Gecko, which is a 750-based chip.

Re:Price Point

[XenoRyet]

Uppon careful reading, the article actualy doesn't give much of a hint as to wheither the new chip is little more than an overclocked gecko or if it's a signifigantly updated architecture based on the gecko.

Personaly I lean tward the latter, but I'm an optimist, and one can clearly get eather opinion out of the article as written.

Re:Price Point

[notrub225]

can i fuck you up the ass? i have good practice.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

The G3 certainly can run OpenOffice.org (what does OOO mean in this context?)

Anyway, I think your logic's flawed. Gekko is not a G3, any more than a G4 is a G3. Both Gekko and the G4 are based upon the G3, but saying that because the G4's performance was equal to the X-Box's PIII, that Gekko's going to be slower because the G3 is, is like saying that because Gekko's performance was equal to the X-Box's PIII, the G4 must be slower because the G3 is.

The CPU side of things most certainly should match up to the older X-Box for performance. That's bad news in the sense that it's a little like an airliner comparing its speed to the latest cross-Atlantic ocean liner, but it's not as bleak as you suggest.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

When your only knowledge of processor architecture stems from Wikipedia and Ars Technica, maybe you should talk less and spend more time studying something you have the requisite formal education to understand. There is absolutely no technical information about the modifications if any to the processor design. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Nintendo won't be performance-competitive with the designs in the XBox 360 or PS3.

Re:Price Point

[OrangeTide]

I think the 750 is a better chip than the 440 (performance-wise).

Re:Price Point

[toddestan]

It's still an interesting point. The PS3 can play PS2 and PSOne games, but it won't have the old Sega games*. You'll need a Nintendo Revolution if you want to play those "50 really good ones" amonst the Sega library. Or go garage saling and pick up a used Genesis cheap :)

*Assuming of course, that no one gets an emulator running on the PS3 like we have on the original XBox.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

Yes it is, but the 750 is the G3, and the same basic core that was in the Gamecube. It was an impressive processor in 1996, when 300 MHz G3s were competing with 200 MHz Pentiums, but this is 2006.

Re:Price Point

[DDLKermit007]

Don't mind them. They are Sony fanboys. The brainwashing has hampered thier ability to make cohesive arguments.

Re:Price Point

[justchris]

I don't know much about the chip the CPU is based on, but a number of developers have reported that the GPU on the Gamecube was only operating at about 50% percent of it's capability because the CPU was simply too slow to handle what the GPU was capable of. Therefore, Nintendo could have just doubled the clockspeed of the CPU and doubled the power of the system with exactly the same amount of RAM and so forth that the Gamecube had. The fact that they've actually decided to update both the CPU & the GPU is probably indicative of something. I suppose it's possible all they did was change the process to a smaller die to up the clockspeed, but it seems like a waste of time not to add a few new features that have cropped up in the 5 years since the Gamecube was originally released.

Re:Price Point

[mausmalone]

That's exactly what was confusing, though. The Flipper GPU had no shaders. It was created in the era before vertex and pixel shaders were commonplace. It did have 8 texture combiners, but those were still fixed-function.

Re:Price Point

[Molt]

I'm assuming by OOO they meant Out-of-Order functionality.

Re:Price Point

[Professor_UNIX]

$35 for all of them combined. Now granted, they were older used titles but who cares if it's an NFL 2004 or NFL 2006 game other than some sports fanatic? Those kinds of people run out and pay $75 for NFL 2006 as soon as it comes out. It's just silly. They've locked us into these stupid upgrade schemes where the majority of stuff that changes, especially in sports games, is the roster. They could easily make that updateable online onto a memory card or something. I know I know, then they wouldn't sell that $75 game each season. Sports games == vampires. :-)

Re:Price Point

[Professor_UNIX]

He's probably from Canada. It's not uncommon to pay $75 here after tax.

Ah, that makes more sense. Usually games are $50-$60 in US dollars in the USA. I've never seen one for $75 unless it's some uber-collector's edition, but I've never bought Xbox games so I figured they might cost more than PS2 games.

Re:Price Point

[Zediker]

And those were general purpose chips designed to support the bloat of a mainsream OS. Comparing a chip for console use and a chip for PC/MAC use is not really possible. Its not going to perform the same way because its not doing the same tasks.

Hz measurements are useless anyway. Throughput is what should be measured. What that processor gets done per cycle is what is important. If I have a 100 Mhz processor that gets 30 things done per cycle, it is just as powerful as 3Ghz processor that gets 1 thing done per cycle. Both are doing 3 Billion operations every second, but the 100Mhz processor is probably doing it with less power and less heat.

The problem is the chip companies have gotten into a Hz war, and the customers now believe that is an accurate measure of performance, when it isnt.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

1) The "bloat" of mainstream OSs really has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this discussion. The Gecko core is still a G3 at heart, in all the ways that matter. It has some tricks like 2-way SIMD in the FPU, but it performs just like a G3 at the same clockspeed.

2) A 30-way 100 MHz processor would not be much faster than a 4-way 100 MHz processor, much less a 1-way 3 GHz processor. The ILP of most code is limited to 2-3 way most of the time, with bursts of 4-5 once in a while.

3) Chip companies have Hz wars because Hz is a first-order impact on performance, and increasing IPC is very difficult. With modern processors, doubling the processor width is likely to net 10-20% improvement in performance. Worse, since many things within the processor scale quadratically with the number of execution units, doubling the processor width effectively quadruples the size of many timing-critical structures. That's why mainstream processors have stuck to 3-4 way designs for the last decade.

4) Hz is a first-order measurement of processor performance. Within similar classes of chip (in-order), it's a good estimator for performance. It's far better, anyway, than any other single property of the processor.

Re:Price Point

[Zediker]

Then why are AMD processors consistantly faster than their Intel counterparts when their clock speed is considerably lower? Throughput, that is why. The fact you still think Hz matters shows how much you truely know about microchip architecture. In my example, what I stated was exactly true for an ideal world. All things being equal a 100Mhz chip performing 30 operations per cycle would perform at the same speed as a 3Ghz chip doing 1 operation per cycle. Both are performing 3 Billion operations in one second worth of time. But you will never see a 100 Mhz chip with 30 operations per cycle in the real world due to the statistical probability of program code order. Programs usualy contain branching statements and dependant variables, thus you wouldnt get more than 9-10 operations before you encounter a conditional statement or a variable dependant on a prior operation. Which is the whole reason the branch look ahead buffer was created. It was designed to predict when a branch statement would occur so it could pre-emt the pipeline and prevent data corruption. That aside, the example was showing in an ideal world that Hz alone means nothing when you comparing processors performing identical tasks. Infact, as an engineer, you can never use Hz for a lone bassis when deciding how effecient a chip for a product will be when speed is of a critical importance. You seem to be confusing Hz for transistor size, which is more of a measure of chip performance.

Re:Price Point

[Anonymous Coward]

Transistor size as a measure of chip performance?

Neither of you are chip designers and it shows. Just shut up already.

Re:Price Point

[be-fan]

Then why are AMD processors consistantly faster than their Intel counterparts when their clock speed is considerably lower?

Because AMD chips can sustain more IPC. I never said Hz was a perfect measurement of performance. However, if confronted with a 8 GHz P4 and a 2 GHz AMD chip, you can be pretty sure the P4 will be faster. IPC's are similar enough in range (within a factor of 2 within similar processor classes), that if a processor is clocked 4x higher you can be pretty sure it'll be faster, regardless of IPC. Moreover, if we're talking about processors with the same architecture, you can assume performance scales linearly with clockspeed within a fairly wide range. That's exactly what were talking about here --- the XBox 360 and PS3 chips have a 4x clockspeed advantage, while the Revolution chip is another PowerPC 750 derivative. The PowerPC 750 is not an Athlon-style design. It's got extremely limited out-of-order execution, and architecturally, its prime benefit over the Cell and Xenon are lower instruction and cache latencies, as well as a shorter pipeline. It'll be lucky to sustain 50% more IPC than the PPE, much less the 300% more it needs to be competitive.

The fact you still think Hz matters shows how much you truely know about microchip architecture.

Of course Hz matters! Clockspeed is the first-order differentiator of performance. You clock a design 50% higher, it'll run code 50% faster! Of all the single parameters of a CPU, clockspeed is the one that gives you the best indicator of performance. Its not a fine-enough tool to distinguish the actual performance of a 2 GHz processor from a 3 GHz processor, but it'll certainly be good enough for 700 MHz versus 3.2 GHz. You see, within a processor class, IPC doesn't vary over that wide a range. A state of the art Athlon 64 has an IPC less than 80% higher than an old IBM 604e. When you're talking about clock-speed deltas as high as we are here, the IPC delta won't be high enough to make that big of a difference.

Programs usualy contain branching statements and dependant variables, thus you wouldnt get more than 9-10 operations before you encounter a conditional statement or a variable dependant on a prior operation.

9-10??? The branch density on common integer code is 1 every 4-5 instructions. Dependent integer instructions happen so often that even a 1-cycle delay for dependent integer operations hurts your IPC significantly. You're also forgetting one key factor that limits IPC --- cache latencies. Cache latencies can cause the processor to stall waiting for memory operands. Very deep out-of-order execution can paper over L1 and L2 cache latencies, but the Gecko isn't a deeply OOO processor.

That aside, the example was showing in an ideal world that Hz alone means nothing when you comparing processors performing identical tasks.

We're not talking about the ideal world, however, we're talking about the real-world. In the real-world, you're lucky to get 2-3 IPC, much less 30. In the real world, IPC considerations aren't enough to significantly alter a comparison with a 4x clockspeed gap. On top of all that, you're talking as if the 750 CPU is some sort of IPC monster. It's not. It's one step up from an in-order chip. It has two integer units, one FPU, and one LSU. It has reservation stations that are 1 or instructions deep, and has a OOO window of about half a dozen instructions. Even the PIII in the original XBox is a far more sophisticated chip. It has similar execution resources, though it has more load/store hardware, but a 20-entry scheduler and a 40-entry OOO window. These resources allow the chip to extract a lot more IPC out of the same amount of execution resources than the 750 can. Both chips are a far cry from a modern IPC monster like the Conroe or Athlon 64. Conroe has about twice the number of execution units as the PIII, as well as a 32-entry scheduler and a massive 96-entry OOO window.

So ultimately, you're comparisons of Athlon 64 versus P4 are really not relevan

Re:Price Point

[OrangeTide]

Just to note. There is not that big of difference between the 750 (G3) and the 7400 (G4) series processors. The G4 does have AltiVec, but I think the little SIMD hack on the Gekko is more practical for gaming. And the G4 can go multiprocessor, but that's not an issue here.

Also, the 750GX (G3) in my system is clocked at 1Ghz, it's one of those upgrade chips (PowerLogix). G3 is available in perhaps the widest clock range of any particular core. At least the IBM ones.

I'd say a 729Mhz Broadway found in the Nintendo Revolution, if the Gekko's performance is any indication is probably on par with the VIA C3 in terms of performance and "modernness". It would kind of be like running a Pentium II at a high clock speed. It's a solid chip, but it's not as advanced as the latest multicore offerings. But a single Gekko is a more advanced design than a single core out of the Playstation3 or Xbox360, but those super fast chips are not very good with branch prediction or with superscalar instruction scheduling. That's the trade off Sony and Microsoft were willing to accept, multiple cores with less complex cores. It's probably the right choice to make, I know I'd rather take a lot of simple cpus than one smart cpu, but don't act like it's 2006 technology versus 1996 technology.

They'll get a significant portion of the market...

[ral315]

Even with crappy specs, it's honestly going to get a great number of parents buying the "affordable" one. That's who Nintendo's trying to aim at...honestly, most Nintendo games are aimed at younger kids anyway (Mario Party, etc.)

A leak?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand how this is a leak. Nintendo gave the specs to IGN and IGN wrote an article. Doing it against Nintendo's wishes makes it a leak and edgy journalism.

Re:A leak?

[GuyWithAccount]

Actually, Nintendo gave dev kits to game development companies, who then gave the specs to IGN.

I think Nintendo probably doesn't want this published, but they can't really do anything about it because they have to give the information to third party game developers. In that sense, it is kind of a "leak", but it's mainly just information that was inevitably going to be released anyway.

Re:A leak?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems doubtful that Nintendo wants to keep their specs a secret at this point, considering what we've seen so far is completely in line with their official estimation. It's not as though they went around promising a system that was a billion jillion times and powerful when they couldn't deliver. *cough*sony*cough*

More likely they haven't been releasing specs because the hardware isn't finalized, or because, as they keep saying, they just don't think the specs are that relevant, publicity-wise.

Re:A leak?

[KDR_11k]

Usually all licensees are under NDAs, leaking information would be breach of contract and releasing trade secrets.

What is this susposed to imply?

[ModernGeek]

I'm getting a negative aura from this reporting. I don't think a weird controller is going to awe enough people to their platform. IIRC, the last I heard from the big cheese at Nintendo is that they are working with augmented reality for their next generation of consoles, and now we are getting a speed bump and a hard to use, tiny controller? Is Nintendo still doing the whole "this console is for kids" thing? Most studies show that the average gamer is 27, not 7. I suppose Nintendo is trying to either fill or a niche market or impress a disappointed crowd. I stopped believing in Nintendo ever since the release of the Game Cube.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[__aaclcg7560]

Nintendo has a secret... the average 27-year-old gamer is a kid at heart with a lot more money than a 7-year-old punk with tight-fisted parents. :P

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[NoTheory]

I don't think there's any implying taking place. The article clearly states that Nintendo isn't trying to battle Sony and Microsoft on raw speed or capacity. They believe that machines are powerful enough already that they don't have to push that particular envelope. They're concentrating on other stuff, controllers, price, making it easy for Cube developers to transition to the revolution.

It's all in the article. This article is interesting because you can see exactly how the revolution is going to match up in terms of power. The fact that you're non-plussed says more about you than nintendo, or this article. It's just saying what's been said all along. we've just got numbers now.

And for the record, i'm nearing 27, and i'm really interested in seeing what's gonna happen on the revolution. :)

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Panaphonix]

I don't think a weird controller is going to awe enough people to their platform.
It might. Wasn't it weird when they came out with a touchscreen on the DS? That's selling huge (fastest ever to reach 5 million in Japan), and creating entirely new genres, including Nintendogs, which sold a quarter-million in the first week, and the new Brain Age game which has done incredibly well with people who have never played a video game in their life.

I suppose Nintendo is trying to either fill or a niche market or impress a disappointed crowd.
They made the most money in the last console wars. This time around, Nintendo might be mass-market while Sony and MS are forced into the comparatively "niche" hardcore gamer market.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

Age and clockspeeds are everything.

If you don't think so then you're obviously older than 14.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I have up modding this topic to point something out.

Nintendo do something Sony and Microsoft don't get. You'll shit yourself when you ehar what it is.. because it's like EARTH SHAKINGLY AMAZING. Nintendo make fun games, games you can pick up and just play, enjoy them and be done with them. They don't need Mario to be super realistic, or 12 hours of FMV per 3 minutes of gameplay. They just make good games.

If you can't see this or think that's "lame". I suggest you stop playing games and start watching films. Fun comes before the latest greatest graphics engine. If you'd look beyond your biast to maybe try Mario kart or something like billy hatcher you may enjoy something.

I'd also like to point out RE:make, RE0, RE4 and quite a few other games on the cube arn't aimed at children. The cube just happens to be a good console which is afordable and so suitable for games aimed at the new and old. Maybe you should check the PS2 release list and see the 5 million children's games released each year for the thing.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[edwdig]

I'm getting a negative aura from this reporting. I don't think a weird controller is going to awe enough people to their platform.

It worked for the DS. And unlike the Xbox 360 and PS3, you don't have to buy an expensive new TV to get a significant difference compared to the old system.

IIRC, the last I heard from the big cheese at Nintendo is that they are working with augmented reality for their next generation of consoles,

Don't know where you heard that. Probably some random rumor site before Nintendo said anything. The rumor sites predicated practically everything but what Nintendo actually ended up doing.

and now we are getting a speed bump and a hard to use, tiny controller?

Nintendo has been saying for the past few years that we don't need more powerful machines. The controller is small because it's one handed. Once you realize that, it seems to fit well in people's hands - at least in the pictures. As to hard to use, everyone who's tried it has said it was great. Do you know something no one else does?

Is Nintendo still doing the whole "this console is for kids" thing?

Still doing? They never did. Bright colors does not mean kids game. Try something like Mario Sunshine sometime. The difficulty level is way to high for most kids. Things like Smash Bros & Mario Kart are big college dorm games. Pokemon, and to a lesser extent Kirby, are the only major things Nintendo really aims at kids.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[thatguywhoiam]

I have up modding this topic to point something out.

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

Nintendo do something Sony and Microsoft don't get. You'll shit yourself when you ehar what it is.. because it's like EARTH SHAKINGLY AMAZING. Nintendo make fun games, games you can pick up and just play, enjoy them and be done with them. They don't need Mario to be super realistic, or 12 hours of FMV per 3 minutes of gameplay. They just make good games.

Few things:

First, Nintendo does make some damn fine electronic entertainment, and only a fool would say otherwise. Nintendo themselves*, as a publishing house I mean.

Sony and Microsoft both own largish arms housing several more-or-less independant development entities, and they both publish a large volume of games. A lot of these games, how shall I say it... they fucking kick ass. Really. These games do exist and are popular. But the volume also contains a helluva lot of crap.

I think you would agree that it makes sense that the platform that is #1 in penetration (by vast amounts) would attract the most crap.

So when you say,
Fun comes before the latest greatest graphics engine. If you'd look beyond your biast to maybe try Mario kart or something like billy hatcher you may enjoy something.

.. yeah, I know. You are in good company. Personally, I went past Mario Kart and landed on Wipeout. And I like 'em both, but Wipeout's more fun. So, what I'm saying is, don't worry about us, I'm sure I speak for all slashdotters when I say that our electronic entertainment is selected with a most judicious eye, in each and every case. :)

(*Rare, not sure what else).

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[LookoutforChris]

Hard to use tiny controller you say ...

Have you ever touched a revolution controller? Are you aware that Game Cube controllers also work with the system? Are you aware that the wireless candybar part of the new controller slides into a more traditional controller housing and provides wireless connnectivity along with additional position information?

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[kryogen1x]

Yeah. We have to realize that this should come to no surprise. Nintendo has been saying all along, it's not trying to compete with uber hardware, and that it wants to remain on the inexpensive size. I can't understand why people are so astonished by these figures.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

now we are getting a speed bump

Actualy you get a speed bump with Xbox360 and PS3, it's called HDTV and that is where most of the power of those consoles will go.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

The article clearly states that Nintendo isn't trying to battle Sony and Microsoft on raw speed or capacity.

That's because they can't beat Sony or Microsoft. Both of those companies can afford to lose a crapload of money for the first few years of this console generation. Nintendo can't - they don't have other divisions to prop them up, they are simply a gaming company.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[glassjaw rocks]

Don't forget the N64 controller, which was the first to feature the thumb analog stick.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[glassjaw rocks]

Sorry, buddy, but a lot of kids would completely own a lot of older gamers. Load up counterstrike for proof.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bingo! You've won the forum. Seriously. I was waiting for someone to say this.

Granted they are repackaging my childhood and selling it to me at today's prices, I'll gladly buy into it. I grew up with this stuff and have missed it, and they're finally making it all available. No more emulators and roms for me :D

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[wmacgyver]

Nintendo made the most money in the last console war? Are you counting the revenue from GBA/DS as well? If so, that's not a good comparison.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[localman]

You know, that's an interesting point that I hadn't thought of but it's obvious in hindsight. I'm a 32 year old Nintendo fan with disposable income. I'm a lot more interested in playing youthful games like Mario and Zelda that have great design than GTA and other "mature" games that are actually aimed at kids who are still thrilled by random violence and high polygon counts. No offense intended, I was one of those kids 16 years ago. In fact I even coded a couple ultra-violent games on my C64 back then. No polygons, though :)

But yeah, people like me are probably a better market. And I could care less what kind of horsepower it has. As long as it has good games I'm in. Nintendo must understand this at some level.

Cheers.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is Nintendo still doing the whole "this console is for kids" thing? Most studies show that the average gamer is 27, not 7.

I am 30 years old. These are the games I have bought for myself in the last 4 years; Medal of Honor, Battlefield 1942, Age of Mythology, Flatout, and Elder Scrolls III. I wait for them to come down in price and never paid more than $30 for any one of them. So in the last 4 years I have spent ~100 bucks on games for myself.

These are the games I have bought for my 5 year old in the last 4 months for his gamecube; Mario Kart Double Dash ($50), Lego Star Wars ($30), Super Monkey Ball 2 ($20), Ed Edd and Eddy ($30), and Eighteen Wheeler ($20). Grand total for four months $150.

Every kid in our neighborhood has a gamecube. I know because he is constantly trading games with the other kids. One of his friends has over 40 gamecube games. Every kid on his baseball team has a gamecube. My wife wants to get him Mario Baseball ($50) because she thinks it will help him learn the basics in a fun way. The local McDonalds and kids dentist office are full of gamecubes for the kids to play.

I would never consider buying myself a $400+ gaming system, simply will not happen. If the new Nintendo were to cost $1,000 and if all of his friends were going to get one, I wouldn't hesitate to pre-order today.

Kids, dads and moms play nintendo which gives Nintendo an 4-12 male/female and 22-50 male/female demographic while playstation and xbox compete for the 13-30 male demographic.

Nintendo will outlast them all.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Davey McDave]

Whoo hoo, darling, there are other replies to this story, and it's been made quite clear that the speeds mean nothing in terms of direct comparison.

Also, has nobody pointed out that it'll be DAMN hard to squeeze out the full power of the PS3/360 with those horrendously awkward multiple cores and fancy doo dahs and etc?

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[GrumblyStuff]

I would never consider buying myself a $400+ gaming system, simply will not happen. If the new Nintendo were to cost $1,000 and if all of his friends were going to get one, I wouldn't hesitate to pre-order today.

Wait, wah? Stop contradicting yourself.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[hkmwbz]

Nintendo was the only console maker who actually turned a profit from their home console. Yes, they made money on the GameCube. Sony and Microsoft lost money on their offerings.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[jchenx]

Still doing? They never did. Bright colors does not mean kids game. Try something like Mario Sunshine sometime. The difficulty level is way to high for most kids. Things like Smash Bros & Mario Kart are big college dorm games. Pokemon, and to a lesser extent Kirby, are the only major things Nintendo really aims at kids.

While I agree with you that Nintendo isn't doing the "this console is for kids" thing anymore, those games you cited weren't exactly the best examples. How many 20-something males do you think will happily admit they played and loved Mario Sunshine? As for Mario Kart, yeah it's definately a fun game and I definately played a lot of it in college myself, but you can't deny there's still a lot of a kid-aspect to it. Given Mario Kart or Burnout Revenge, I'm willing to bet your average 20-something alpha male is going to go for Burnout.

Now if you really wanted to prove that Nintendo ain't kiddy anymore, check out BMX XXX. It was released for all three consoles, but it was the PS2 version that was actually censored. Yes, we're long gone from the "Mortal Kombat blood censoring" days of Nintendo.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Kuku_monroe]

"Suicidal Nazis From Mars It's the year 3001 and the Earth is invaded by kamakazi spaceships from Mars emblazoned with a swastika. Of course it is your job to eliminate every motherfucking last one of them and take on the mother ship."

Amazing!

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[DrXym]

Nintendo do something Sony and Microsoft don't get. You'll shit yourself when you ehar what it is.. because it's like EARTH SHAKINGLY AMAZING. Nintendo make fun games, games you can pick up and just play, enjoy them and be done with them. They don't need Mario to be super realistic, or 12 hours of FMV per 3 minutes of gameplay. They just make good games.

That's the #1 favourite excuse from Nintendo apologists when comparing hardware or market share. Sony, Microsoft and the army of developers for their platforms also make fun games. I don't have to cite the titles because there are so many that it would be a pointless exercise.

If you can't see this or think that's "lame". I suggest you stop playing games and start watching films. Fun comes before the latest greatest graphics engine. If you'd look beyond your biast to maybe try Mario kart or something like billy hatcher you may enjoy something.

It is lame, because because no system has the monopoly on fun. I've owned Nintendo systems over the years and I can't say they were any more "fun" than anything you can get on another platform. There were fun titles of course, but the PS2 has fun titles and so does the XBox. Once you realise that, you should consider which offers the best choice of titles, value and features that suit your pocket. Personally I have a finite amount of space by TV and I want something that is capable of more than playing games, be it playing DVDs, music, browsing or whatever.

Of course, there is another factor to consider. The Gamecube is allegedly more powerful than a PS2, yet it has a fraction of the market share. It's in last place in fact. If it's such a fun console and cheaper, why is that so? I suspect part of it is Nintendo's self-inflicted policy of making predominantly "cute" cartoony, kid friendly games.

I assume Nintendo want their next gen box to do better, but if the hardware is as underpowered as implied, then the games makers are not going to bother with the platform. Porting from XBox 360 to PS3 or vice versa will be a comparitively straightforward job. Porting to the Revolution will be a huge pain in the ass. That means the Revolution stands more chance of becoming a niche than even the Gamecube is. That means even more "exclusive" cutesy games than the current generation box. Nintendo sure as hell had better make their wand system a compelling reason to buy the console or their system will be DOA.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[KDR_11k]

The screenshots aren't showing (says "0 bits per pixel") for the games :(.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[LKM]

How many 20-something males do you think will happily admit they played and loved Mario Sunshine?

I'm 26 and male. I own and love Sunshine. Most of my (male, similarly aged) friends play and love it too, and those who don't play it see absolutely no problem with 26 years old males playing games like Sunshine.

We own both Mario Kart: Double Dash and Burnout 2. Guess which game is being played more often? Not Burnout.

In fact, the game most often played around here is Super Monkey Ball 2. Hardly an "adult oriented" game.

Nintendo games aren't aimed at children. They're aimed at everyone who wants to have fun and isn't so insecure that he can't play games without blood, gore and tits.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[LnxAddct]

People were saying the same thing about the DS, which is a fraction of the power of the PSP, yet on my college campus the DS is goddamn everywhere. If the success of the DS vs PSP says anything, then Nintendo will be laughing at the competition very soon.
Regards,
Steve

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[masklinn]

Nintendo was pretty much the first on anything anyway.

First on shoulder buttons, first on analog stick, first on rumble, first on standard quad-player interface, first on wireless, first on touchscreen, ...

They created pretty much every hardware improvement to gameplay since they started releasing the NES, and many of the truly original games of the console market.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

you forgot something else....

Adults with a disposable income also have a pricepoint where they will quickly impulse buy without thought. and the $50-$70 price point for the Xbox360 and PS3 are not it.

$25.00 - $35.00 will get a person to grab a game every week when they get groceries. the horribly overpriced Xbox and PS3 games will certianly not.

Want proof of this? ok...

Nintendo DS games sell over 3 to 1 over PSP games. This is on price alone! I know more people with 2 Nintendo DS's and doubles of almost every game(12 families) then the 1 family I know that has PSP that has 2 units but not 2 of each game. I know plenty that have 1 PSP in the house and a few games.

The DS has more games that are fun to play 2 player and online. and the gameshare capability kicks the crap out of the PSP in almost every way (1 frigging PSP game supports this, most are made by greedy arsehead companies like EA that will not support such "sharing".

Sony is pricing themselves out of the market. the PSP is a great device it's just way to o expensive, the games are horribly overpriced and the PS3 will be worse yet. the Xbox has NEVER interested me... it feels like an atari jaguar. Late comer wannabe to the gaming market.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[pagrab]

I am absolutely at your side in this - the idea that Zelda and Mario are for kids and violent games are for adults is a myth. From my experience it looks that it is completely opposite. But there is one flaw in this logic - yes the average 30 year old guy has more money than the average kid but the kid has much more time to play games. The 30 year old guy will buy games for let's say 30% of his disposable income - because he doesn't need more than 1-2 a month. A kid will spend all of his money because he will need a new game every week.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[nickos]

IIRC they still have a patent on the original cross shaped D-pad, which is why the Playstation has its 4 semi-seperate direction buttons and the XBox has the round one. I've only ever owned 2 consoles, the CD32 and the PC Engine and I'm going to be buying a Revolution to support the underdog and the only real remaining innovator in the console business.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Lave]

Spot on Mister. It kind of breaks down like this (in my experience): Fun, cool, bright, happy games please" - Pokemon, Mario, Katamari D, Sonic, Nintendogs, Zelda, Animal Crossing, Eye Toy. The Sims. Games for presents.

12 - 18 == "Dude, I don't want no kiddie shit, I'm not buying a DS/Rev it has numbers which are smaller than this other consoles numbers!" - GTA, EA games, Juiced, Need for Speed, Pimp my Noun.Generic FPS N+1, Final Fantasy Semester - whilst scraping money together for a game, and pirating like mad.

16 - 20 == "Dude, this is Old School!" - GTA, Resident Evil N+1, PoP: 1,2,3, Sonic, Mario, Shoot em ups and only the Good RPGs.

20+ == " Fuck my life is busy, stressful and tense, so fun, cool, bright, happy games please!" - Pokemon, Mario, Katamari D, Sonic, Nintendogs, GTA, Resident Evil 4, PoP: Sands of Time, Zelda, (RPG's are too long now.). I've got money, so I'll buy games (but only good ones).

As a 24yr old, I feel Nintendo are the only company that care about making games I would like, rather than the 12-18 brand of player. And now I BUY those games because I can afford to, and because they deserve it.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Mr.Dippy]

BMX XXX is a bad example. That game was horrible and just because you put boobies into a game doesn't mean that it is instantly cool and all the 20ish gamers want it. I played BMX XXX and Mario Sunshine and both are gay for two completly seperate reasons.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Dracolytch]

Nintendogs isn't an entirely new genre... it's an offshoot of the pet simulation games of the 90s. It's just been a while since we've seen one. Do a search for Catz and Dogz.

~D

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[mary_will_grow]

Man, I was totally with you until you started talking about how "difficult" mario sunshine was. are you frigging retarded?

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[PKFC]

Nintendogs, which sold a quarter-million in the first week
Well the first week sales numbers aren't a good indication of the DS's impact. I mean a Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy game can break a million in less than 100 hours.... What IS important for Nintendo is the continued sales of these games as discussed in Iwata's TGS 2005 keynote. He said that games like Nintendogs and Brain Training sold well for a number of months unlike PS2 (and most other system's games) that have a burst of sales for a week or three and then fall to the wayside and don't even deserve being on the shelf after two months.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[metamatic]

I played Mario Sunshine. It was OK, but at the end of the game I found myself feeling like I'd eaten an entire box of chocolates. I put the GameCube away and got out the PS2 and played something less saccharine to take the taste away.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Andrew Kismet]

Some people still can't get their head around analogue control... and he's right, it WAS difficult - I had to do many, many retries on levels, but I still completed it with every Shine. I think your definition of "difficult" might be different to his.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[metamatic]

If you think GTA is about violence, you're missing the point.

And while I like my GameCube, it needs more games that aren't saccharine-sweet.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Headcase88]

:) I like bright colours. They make it easier to see what's going on / know where you are.

Take Block Fort from Mario Kart 64. Imagine if the blocks were gray or just near gray. It would be annoying.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[pembo13]

When exactly did being a kid becoome bad? Did I miss a memo?

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[jchenx]

Nintendo games aren't aimed at children. They're aimed at everyone who wants to have fun and isn't so insecure that he can't play games without blood, gore and tits.

I probably should have pointed out that I have no problems with the titles Nintendo makes. Although I never got into Mario Sunshine, I play a healthy dose of Mario Kart DS and Animal Crossing DS. I agree, Nintendo does a great job of making games that appeal to people of all ages. I'm actually a big fan of casual games overall, which have that same goal.

That said, I was referring to the 20-something alpha males. Think of the frat guys in college who only played those blood/gore/tit games. Or those jocks in high school who picked on anyone in the computer lab. Halo is the b0mb, Burnout is the shitz, and GTA is the best game evah. Unfortunately (at least to me), they make a large part of that hardcore gamer audience. Why do you think GTA sold so many copies? True story: I was channel surfing on the radio, and came across some DJ talking about how awesome and cool GTA was. He got a lot of other folks calling in saying the same thing. At the same time, they dissed anything on Nintendo for being "that Pokemon system".

Do I like that comparison? No I do not. But I'm not blind to it either. That said, I don't think Nintendo needs to change anything. They're already on the right track, since they make games targeted to everyone AND they now let 3rd party developers make whatever titles they want (hence BMX XXX). I'd love to change people's perceptions, but that's not possible.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[LightningBolt!]

>> I don't think a weird controller is going to awe enough people to their platform.
> It might. Wasn't it weird when they came out with a touchscreen on the DS? That's selling huge...

I have a feeling the new controller will be more like Nintendo's VirtualBoy in terms of success.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[localman]

Still the case? I admit I threw up the screenshots _after_ I made the post (I've been meaning to for a while). Maybe you caught it in-progress?

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[localman]

Actually, from what I hear GTA is a great all-around game, and is much more than just a violence fest. Having not played it I can't really say. But I think a lot of people get a distaste for violence after 25 or so. I know I did. I can still stomach it fine -- I enjoyed Kill Bill, and even Hostel, but I don't seek the stuff out like I used to. So while I might enjoy GTA if I got into it, it's just not what I'm attracted to. I have a limited amount of time for gaming, and I'm far more inclined to try something with a less overtly violent tone, like Darwinia.

But to each their own. Enjoy what you like :)

Cheers.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Darby]

They're there now.
This one is just too awesome. I hope you got a mention in the credits for Carmageddon. That was clearly a direct ripoff with some fancied up graphics ;-)

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[localman]

Heh, thanks. I should bring a lawsuit against them or something ;)

That screenshot is probably the most offensive pedestrian to kill... the wheelcharir guy. But you get to run over kids, dogs and old folks too.

Cheers.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Mullinator]

Funny, I still remember people saying the exact same thing about the DS. Now those people are eating their words. Thats not to say that the new controller is guaranteed to succeed however, but the hands on reports that have been comming from various media outlets (CNN included) make it sound extremelly promising.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[Anonymous Coward]

That means the Revolution stands more chance of becoming a niche than even the Gamecube is. That means even more "exclusive" cutesy games than the current generation box. Nintendo sure as hell had better make their wand system a compelling reason to buy the console or their system will be DOA.

Nintendo don't have to do anything other than what they've been doing all along. GC may have the least market share, but it made the most money. Nintendo make games and make money. MS and Sony buy market share and are trying to 'get control of the living room' by adding all this multimedia stuff to the equation and blu ray etc, they're trying to be the one proprietry system that all houses 'need' in the same way that winxp is the one os that everyone 'needs'.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[DrXym]

Nintendo don't have to do anything other than what they've been doing all along. GC may have the least market share, but it made the most money.

This is another common apologist excuse. Nintendo is a business. It doesn't like being #3, and would rather be #1. Being #1 implies 5x the games, 5x the number of consumers and 5x the profits.

As stated, I'm sure there are "fun" games on the Nintendo, but with the Revolution falling so far behind the other consoles, you can look forward to more cutesy Mario / Pokemon games. Why? Because Nintendo will have shoulder more of the games development because less independent developers will bother with a platform that implies rewriting rather than porting titles.

Personally I see no problem with cutesy cartoon games, but I'd despise any platform that restricts the kinds of game I played, or expected me to be happy about seemingly half the titles being Mario or Pokemon games. I expect that's the reason for many people shunning the platform and its just going to get worse with the Revolution unless the price advantage is totally compelling. It certainly wasn't for the Gamecube.

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[KDR_11k]

They still don't work in Opera but show up when I throw them at Photoshop...

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[DeadScreenSky]

I'm a lot more interested in playing youthful games like Mario and Zelda that have great design than GTA and other "mature" games that are actually aimed at kids who are still thrilled by random violence and high polygon counts.

If you don't think GTA has succeeded almost entirely because of its great design, you're no better than the (largely mythical) audience you're attacking. Your judging is entirely based on looks, not substance.

And "high polygon counts" in a GTA game? They are some of the homeliest looking games that were released in the last generation! Even vaguely upgraded N64-ports like Kirby's Air Ride feature better graphics! :D

Re:What is this susposed to imply?

[localman]

You can read my other reply to a similar comment, but to summarize, I'm certainly not attacking anyone or even complaining. It's just that I have a limited amount of time to invest in gaming, so I choose stuff that looks interesting to me at first glance. GTA doesn't, and it's mostly because I've been through that phase. The game (which I've never played) may be the best thing ever, but I'll never know. Perhaps my loss, but that's how we all deal with the overwhelming options, right?

Whether there's a large group of people like me is another question, and that's the theory I and the parent poster were proposing.

Cheers.

Clarification

[Anonymous Coward]

So they are basically just repackaging the Gamecube and adding the new controller?

Re:Clarification

[__aaclcg7560]

No different than a repackaged XBox called XBox 360! I think the PlayStation 3 is trying to hard to be an all-purpose multimedia box.

Re:Clarification

[Anonymous Coward]

the only games sony won't get are nintendo and microsoft first party games. i'm just betting the wide variety of games on ps2 will trascend into the next generation ps3s which means more variety, increased comptetition to make better games and therefore better games! when god of war 3 ravages across hdtvs around the world i hope you still have fun playing mario revolution and other old school games youd think might be fun but control completely differently from what you're used to, well you never know i guess.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Adri9n]

Yeah, like Kidtendo right? I hate this attitude.

Hardware isn't everything....

[GeorgeMcBay]

Of course, at the end of the day its all about the games and how fun they are, but even if you DO focus on the graphics, consider:

The original Xbox is, on paper, much more powerful than the GameCube and yet for my money (and I own many games on both of these systems), nothing on the original Xbox looks nearly as good as Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube.

I'm a lot more excited about the Revolution than either of the other next-gen systems (though I'll probably buy an Xbox360 when more good games come out for it)... in the meantime I'll keep trying to boost my online ranking in Tetris DS.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[RandomPeople]

i know very little about programming, much less about programming applied to the development of games, but you statement makes total sense...
i think we may measure the value of a gaming company by the way it manages its resources (both hardware and software) to maximize its potential as a whole and by the way it translates this synergy to make friendly-user, original and avante-garde games...
the gamecube, with less impressing specs than its contemporaries, managed to do that...
if the revolution is capable of achieving that and, additionaly, introducing in the gameing world a new proposal of gamer-game interaction (the new controller), then we may be able to say that Nintendo is accomplishing its role of being the intrepid, sometimes reckless and sometimes succesful competitor of the videogames arena

P.D: excuse me if i make any writing mistakes, english is not my mother language

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[JonLatane]

Now, don't take this the wrong way. RE4 is probably the best game I've played in years, especially since I really prefer a good single player experience.

And the Gamecube is definitely close to comparable with the Xbox (except in terms of GPU power maybe). Considering that Nintendo can't throw away money on each console, it's quite impressive.

But the thing about RE4 is that it's on, shall we say, "rails." It's easier to make a good-looking game when you have a great deal of control over every aspect of the environment. Metroid Prime 2 is really a much better show of the cube's power.

But the best looking game of that generation (although far from the best playing) was one called Wreckless: The Yakuza Missions, an early Xbox game. Google it for some screens, it's absolutely insane, and it's got a sense of randomness, of open free roaming that RE4 lacks.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[justchris]

I don't know about Wreckless being a prettier game, but the Xbox was superior to the Cube, but only just barely. The reasons are twofold, one each for each system. The Xbox was designed like a PC, not like a game console, so despite having really high specs, it underperformed because most of the processor cycles were wasted. On the other hand, the gamecube underperformed because it's processor was too slow to ever utilize more than about 50% of what the GPU was capable of.

That being said, the 360 is built much, much better than the original Xbox. But the Rev has a faster processor, and a GPU based on the GC one that has already proven itself to be superior. Only time will tell how much of a difference this really makes.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[MrNougat]

I seem to recall (someone will correct me if I'm wrong, I trust) the same issue with the Atari 5200 way back in the day. When it was released, it was quite a powerful console -- but the games available for it were marginal.

I'm not a big gamer, but I think the "form over function" model will usually fail. A (re)playable library of games will support a system with weaker specs over a high-powered system with weak games.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[kerrle]

RE4 is hardly on rails any more than MP2 is.

The original RE games were, sure, but 4 has just about as much of an open environment as the Metroid Prime games or most 3rd person adventures.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[G-funk]

What a load of smouldering bullshit TFA was.... Twice as powerful as the gamecube, and almost as powerful as XBOX 1???? How could anybody keep reading after coming across that sentence?

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Breakfast Pants]

but where most of the spectacularness comes from is the in-game rendered cutscenes, which are by definition on rails.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[bronney]

The original Xbox is, on paper, much more powerful than the GameCube and yet for my money (and I own many games on both of these systems), nothing on the original Xbox looks nearly as good as Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube.

Exactly matey, I got the PS2 at the time of Grand Turismo 4 launch. My uber 1337 6800GT isn't pumping out near as good fluidity as the GT4. It's the GAMES that makes me buy consoles, crazy taxi for dreamcast, gt4 for ps2, and now, jedi knight ultra uber slash with saber for revolution. Ahem.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[beren12]

The dreamcast did an amazing job for being so under powered, compared to the ps2 and friends that came after it. Just because someone doesn't throw 5GHz of power at a game doesn't mean it can't look amazing.

Hitachi SuperH SH-4 RISC CPU @ 200MHz
NEC PowerVR2 graphics chip
Yamaha AICA sound system (64 channel PCM sound)
16 MB main memory
8 MB texture memory
2 MB sound memory
12X GD-ROM (double density CD-ROM) drive
33.6Kbit modem or 10/100 Ethernet

Also, this thing could do 800x600 VGA, totally cool. They are still a ton of fun to play, esp. Soul Calibur ;-) I'm *still* trying to get the ethernet adaptor...

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[danpsmith]

People constantly look at hardware specs to figure out what a good system will be anymore. It's meaningless. If you want examples just look in the past or the present. How about the PSP, has better graphics capabilities, support for movies, and all other kinds of stuff, how does it fare? Not as well as the DS for other reasons. A lot of the console has to do with the way it is designed and how games play on it, not exactly what they look like.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Mordaximus]

The original Xbox is, on paper, much more powerful than the GameCube...

No, it isn't. Most people don't know how to interpret what's on paper - they apply PC think to everything else. More Mhz and more RAM is always better. And that simply is not the case.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[rob1980]

Right on. Technical specs to me haven't meant anything since after the 16-bit era was over with. Just give me good games, and the rest will take care of itself.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[John_Booty]

The original Xbox is, on paper, much more powerful than the GameCube and yet for my money (and I own many games on both of these systems), nothing on the original Xbox looks nearly as good as Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube.

I agree with the Gamecube having great graphics, and with RE4 being one of the best and prettiest games of the generation.

But did you play Ninja Gaiden on the XBox? That was graphically a few steps up from RE4 in my opinion. Great game, too, although different enough from RE4 that I won't compare apples to oranges there.

The XBOX DOA fighting games were even prettier, although it's a lot easier to make a pretty fighting game (two characters and a small play area) than a pretty pseudo-free-roaming game ala RE4 or Ninja Gaiden...

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[JonLatane]

It's on rails in the same way as the others, just in 3D instead of pre-rendered 2D. I realized it was on rails a few minutes into the game when, following trails up to the town at the beginning, I couldn't even walk up a hill off the trail to see more of the environment. It's still got the "invisible walls."

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[harrkev]

A lot of the console has to do with the way it is designed and how games play on it, not exactly what they look like.

... and how much it costs.

Let's face facts here. There are a lot of gaming fans who work tech during the day and play games at night. They have money to burn. Or perhaps the children of such people.

But there is a LOT more people out there where the family is struggling to make ends meet. Christmas comes around, and junior wants a game system. What do the parents buy:

1) Game system which costs $400 or more and $60 games.
2) Game system which costs $200 and games are around $40.

In a case like this, specs don't matter. You buy what you can afford. For this reason and this reason alone, Revolution will sell well.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[a_nonamiss]

I know this article was featured on Slashdot, but for a really good explanation of why hardware specs aren't going to mean much anymore, I highly recommend reading Life After the Crash by David Wong

The essence of the article is that the direction that video games are moving in can't hold up much longer. Sure, Call of Duty 2 on the Xbox360 looks beautiful. You can see slightly better fog effects than previous generation consoles, and you can see beads of sweat dripping down the enemy soldiers' faces, but does this really make it a better game? For about 10 minutes your jaw hangs open at the realism of the game, but then you get used to it and realize it's exactly like every other first person shooter ever made. OK, instead of shooting demon possessed aliens from another dimension, you are shooting nazis, but does that really make the game any different once you adjust to your surroundings? Or, even more to the point, does it make it better than the last CoD title that you played?

The bottom line is that Nintendo is trying to do something that's actually different. They're betting the farm on the fact that gamers like myself are getting tired of shelling out more and more money for consoles that are less and less innovative. It's a gamble, and it's possible that they could be doing this too early, but they have proven in the past that they have a pretty good sense about the industry. I, for one, will stand in line to buy my Revolution, even if the fog effects aren't quite as good as the significantly more expensive Xbox360.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Junks Jerzey]

I seem to recall (someone will correct me if I'm wrong, I trust) the same issue with the Atari 5200 [atarihq.com] way back in the day. When it was released, it was quite a powerful console -- but the games available for it were marginal.

"Powerful" needs qualification. Compared to the Atari 2600, yes, it was powerful. But realize that the 5200, released in 1982, used the same hardware from the Atari 400/800 released 2-3 years earlier. Most of the games for it were repackaged Atari 800 games, as well. A notable exception is that the 5200 only had 16K RAM, and many Atari 800 games required more, so lots of the cooler games were never ported to it.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

RE4 looked pretty good, but I'd use Metroid Prime to showcase the GameCube's power. But even still, Metroid Prime doesn't stand up to Ninja Gaiden or Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory in terms of smoothness and polygon counts--albeit from an artistic standpoint I don't think polygon counts are as important as style.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Queer Boy]

I really predict the Revolution is going to be the new NES. It is going to steal all the thunder from MS and Sony that not only is it cheaper, has an easier to use as well as innovative controller, but it also plays all of the Gamecube games as well as a slew of old games from Nintendo, SEGA, and NEC/Hudson.

LOTS of female gamers just want to be able to play NES games. LOTS of older gamers just want the simplicity of story and gameplay without having to learn wacky controls for a pseudo 3D world where navigating the world is the majority of the gameplay.

Plus it's been rumoured by Nintendo themselves that Twilight Princess will be enhanced on a Revolution.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

You buy the $200 console because it's cheaper and your kid throws a shit fit because he wanted a PS3 like all his friends have, that has all of the cool-looking games. So you increase your debt further (after charging the $200 console for xmas), and buy a PS3 to make your shithead kid happy. Total cost: $800 in consoles and games, with the Revolution collecting more dust than a 80-year old woman's cooch.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

instead of shooting demon possessed aliens from another dimension, you are shooting nazis

The German army in WWII were not Nazis. The SS were, but the Wehrmacht [generally] were not.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[AragornSonOfArathorn]

The bottom line is that Nintendo is trying to do something that's actually different. They're betting the farm on the fact that gamers like myself are getting tired of shelling out more and more money for consoles that are less and less innovative.

Hear, hear. I am also eagerly awaiting the Rev. I currently have an Xbox that I just got last year and am enjoying it. A lot of older Xbox games, which I've never played, are now dirt cheap, so that's nice. However, I have no interest in the 360, or Playstation. I wish they'd have made an Xbox version of Katamari, but other than that, I don't care about the PS2/PS3.

The backwards compatability of the Nintendo Revolution is going to be huge. There will be a lot of people like me who have NES, SNES and Sega Genesis consoles that may not be in the best shape anymore and want to play the old games again, or play games that we wanted back in the day and never got. I also like the N64 compatibilty, if only to play Bond so I can relive post-drinking knives-only deathmatches from college ;-) Also, my fiance doesn't really like video games, but she LOVES Mario Party, heh. Since I never got a N64 of my own, this will be sweet. GC compatibility is nice, too. There are several GC games that I'd like to play, but can't justify buying a GC console when I just got an Xbox last year, and when the Revolution is coming out so soon. The Rev will be absolutely perfect if Nintendo or somebody else works out a way to play Dreamcast games on it. And, of course, I'm sure there will be plenty of sweet Rev-native games.

So, I'll see you in line :-D

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

HD. That's what makes console gaming with the new gen "better". The ability to make fine distinctions at distance is much greater at 720p than SD TV resolutions in FPS games.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Shadarr]

I thought the cutscenes were pretty meh. What blew me away was when you go back to the village in the lightning storm, and it's pouring rain, and the lightning briefly illuminates the farm wife coming at you with a rusty carving knife. In-frickin-sane. The mine was pretty cool too. Also, the water effects for the boating section were as good as those in Wave Race: Blue Storm, which is an entire game devoted to boating.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Shadarr]

Most of the power in the 360 is being devoted to rendering pretty pictures on HDTVs. Nintendo made a strategic decision not to support HDTV, and thus they don't need all that extra power. Games can't really look much better than RE4 on a standard TV.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[ejp1082]

The Gamecube was always priced lower than the other two consoles - $200 to their $300 at launch, if I recall. It didn't seem to have a huge impact on the sales numbers. It'd possible the price differential will be much greater this time around, but I still don't see it as having a big impact in the overall decision to buy. Parents will still get the system kids ask for.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[monopole]

While it doesn't have native movie support, the GameBoyMicro/DS beat the hell out of the PSP with a PlayYan. The combination of insane battery life and cheap SD flash easily compensate for the smaller screen

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Anonymous Coward]

David Wong

Have you read completely through JDatE? I honestly think that it is one of the funniest stories that I have ever read, barring none except Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Blackspace]

I have to argue the fact that you say " nothing on the original Xbox looks nearly as good as Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube ". Being a huge gamer i can tell you their are plenty of games that surpass The Evil. Take for instance Ninja Gaiden, Dead or Alive, Soul Caliber, and Chronicals of Riddick. These games are Beautiful. Iam indeed a huge Nintendo Fan and Nintendo has its games that are Fantastic. But i wouldnt go that far as saying the Nintendo is superior over the Xbox in the Graphics department. Its like saying Playstation One has better Graphics than Gamecube. I am excited about the new Revolution and the great games to come. I love the 360 as it has fantastic games( Ghost Recon, Oblivion, Call of Duty) to name a few. But you know Nintendo, They alwasy have the innovating Ideas. The only one iam not so sure of is the PS3, but thats another story.

Re:Hardware isn't everything....

[Manmademan]

I'll agree with you- the cutscenes were nice but the real WOW factor came in for me the first time you're detected in that village and are fighting off a horde of crazed (FAST!) villagers out for your blood- coming in the windows, throwing firebombs, kicking in doors, coming after you with chainsaws...intense, man. RE4 is a LOT more action oriented than it's slow moving predecessors.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[cephalien]

I dunno about that; what portion of the game 'producers' are going to want to bring games to the table for a system like that?

Yes, perhaps games for younger players, but still.. when they see a side-to-side comparison of the graphics and 'WOW' factor, which will they choose?

Considering that the 'playability' of games has taken a far backseat to graphics and flashy stuff, I see this being the biggest flop since that 3D gameboy thing.

Ugh, this bullshit again.

[mcc]

Matt Casamassina hates Nintendo and takes every opportunity to talk about how weak and worthless their hardware is. Every three months for awhile now he's posted "leaked" specs about the Revolution. Every one of these "leak" stories takes care to talk about how much more powerful the XBox 1 is than the Revolution. In all cases the source is "sources".

Frankly I think it's most likely the Revolution will be the weakest of the three next gen consoles, but I'll believe this when I see , and after the rabid and rapidly decaying lack of journalistic integrity shown by Matt Casamassina in the last couple of years, I personally refuse to believe anything I read on revolution.ign.com at all.

You can feel free to believe what you want of course.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[SetupWeasel]

IGN works with Nintendo on some of the aspects of their online service. Someone at that company knows the truth.

If there specs are real, Matt Cassissippi is endangering people in his company bound by NDAs. It doesn't matter if they told him or not. If the specs aren't real, he appears to be misleading his readers, because someone at his company knows.

I think it is irresponsible for him to report this either way.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[zealot]

I agree. The "performance" number he's quoting are complete crap.

"IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz."

and

"Revolution's ATI-provided "Hollywood" GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube's GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz."

and

"Clearly, numbers don't mean everything, but on paper Revolution's CPU falls performance-wise somewhere well beyond GameCube and just shy of the original Xbox."

THE MAJORITY OF HIS COMPARISON IS BASED ON CLOCK SPEED. Yet he's comparing completely different architectures. Gamecube had an IBM flipper chip (some sort of Power-based core), Xbox had an x86, X360 has 3 simplified Power-based cores running at high clock speeds. Gamecube had an ATI graphics, XBox had NVIDIA graphics. You can't just throw random MHz numbers out there and draw any type of conclusion. Ok, I suppose there's one type: an invalid one.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[stonedonkey]

IGN works with Nintendo on some of the aspects of their online service. Someone at that company knows the truth.

IGN works with Nintendo on some of the aspects of the DS online service. As you may recall, the online infrastructure of N's consoles closely resembles two cans connected by a string.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[SetupWeasel]

You missed the memo on Nintendo's Wi-Fi Connection. It will be used on the Revolution too.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[DigitlDud]

Gamecube actually didn't really have ATI graphics. ATI was just on the business end of things. The GPU was designed by Art-X which is an SGI spin-off. This gave Gamecube a lot of unique graphics capabilities. Anything related to SGI is a step up from ATI in my book.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

While its true that clock speed isn't everything, it's pretty clear that this console will be no match for the XBox 360 or PS3 performance-wise. They will *have* to have some amazing games to gain any success, because AFAIK, the price tag of the console isn't what makes the difference to the consumers, people really buy consoles for the games, and seem to be willing to pay relatively expensive prices.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[TrancePhreak]

The GameCube graphics chip was actually designed by someone that ATI bought up right before GameCube hit the market. It has none of the shader technology that ATI was using at the time, or any shaders for that matter. That being so, I still think it beat the pants off the PS2 at times. (Expecially on multii-platform titles)

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[justchris]

Actually that's partially incorrect. Yes, it was developed by ArtX, a company that was bought out by ATI approximately a month after the Gamecube was originally released.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

>Matt Casamassina hates Nintendo

Wait, the same Matt Casamassina who constantly writes about how he's more excited about Revolution than about any other console? Give me a break. Don't blame Matt for the fact that you don't like the system's specs.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a Mac user aren't you

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[kerrle]

Yes, but the Art-X team behind the gamecube's graphics chip went on to be heavily involved in modern ATI GPUs. There's definitely a relationship between the two.

This isn't a case where ATI bought a team just to slap a sticker on the cube; they bought a team and actually integrated it into their development process, and actually used their tech.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

I don't see what's wrong with what he reported. I don't find it hard to believe that a writer for IGN might be close enough with a few revolution developers to be able to get some basic info such as clockspeeds on the revolution.

Besides, if you read the article, he isn't trying to make the point that revolution is likely a POS that can't compete with the other next gen consoles. He's simply making a point about their strategy, which clearly isn't trying to design the most powerful console of the three. Even if the architectures are drastically different, the difference in clockspeeds and available memory is very significant.

I know some of you fanboys might feel emasculated by these specs, but your own assumptions and criticisms of the article are totally off base. I mean, why are those numbers complete crap? How do you know they're crap? Are you a close acquaintance with someone who's working on the revolution? And did the author suggest that the architectures were the same for all the platforms, or that the hardware performance of the system can be perfectly and accurately extrapolated from the clockspeeds? No, he simply gave information that he had, which were the clockspeeds in this case. He leaves it up to the reader to extrapolate what they will by comparing them with the numbers for gamecube, and other consoles, and the author in fact states "numbers don't mean everything."

So don't rip on the author for simply reporting the information that he has. If hearing the specs for the revolution pisses you off, then just don't read articles reporting on them.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"As you may recall, the online infrastructure of N's consoles closely resembles two cans connected by a string."

This would have been funny like back in 2003. Today it's 'whaaa...?' Sorta like a Windows user making cracks that Linux doesn't support USB.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[mcc]

I'm sorry, what were you saying? I'm afraid I couldn't hear you over Matt Casamassina's incessant whining about the lack of HDTV support in the Revolution, lack of voice acting in Zelda, and lack of "production values" in everything in the world that isn't a Halo game.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[ad0gg]

All I know it isn't powerful enough to do HD output something both the original xbox and ps2 were able to do.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[GrumblyStuff]

I mean, why are those numbers complete crap? How do you know they're crap?

GameCube GPU 162MHz
Revolution GPU 243MHz
Xbox GPU 233MHz

GameCube CPU 485MHz
Revolution CPU 729MHz
Xbox CPU 733MHz

While the Xbox beat the GC in speed, the graphics were largely comparable. Now we have the Rev clocking in at around the same speeds of the Xbox and only having to output at most 480p using similar (right?) processors. But that all depends on what you mean by crap. The specs themselves or the crappy article making it seem like the Rev will barely be more powerful than the Xbox?

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[G-funk]

They're complete crap because the xbox is only a gnat's dick faster than the cube (the difference is just about nil if you compare the two of them to the PS2). It can't be both twice as powerful as the cube and almost as powerful as an xbox.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

Have you played Soul Caliber on Xbox and on Gamecube? They are no way comparable in terms of graphics. PS2 was much closer. Gamecube relied on gameplay, not hardware performance. Also, the article only gave those figures, it didn't suggest the Gamecube would barely be as powerful as the Xbox. This is different generation hardware, and the author himself states that these numbers don't tell the full story. People are just unhappy that the article mentions one aspect of the console wars that nintendo isn't focusing on, and thus isn't their strong point.

But the people getting mad at the author for pointing this out are missing the point. And it doesn't make sense to criticize the author for something he didn't imply. Might I point out that the same people mad at the article for seemingly making the nintendo revolution out to be a POS seem to be the only ones drawing those invalid conclusions from the numbers published. So it's even more idiotic to project these ideas onto the article writer, when he himself made no such suggestions, and then getting mad at him for making such claims.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

Even assuming that you're right (personally, I find Xbox's graphics to be far better than both the gamecube and ps2's), what does that have to do with anything? All he wrote were the numbers. He also wrote that numbers aren't everything. He didn't say that the 360 is 400% faster than the revolution just because its clockspeed is 4x the revolution's. No one is making such claims. Get a grip. These figures are only crap because you're reading them wrong and assuming that everyone else must be doing the same. But that wasn't even what the author was implying. The article simply talks about Nintendo focusing its energy on coming up with innovating ideas like the free-style controller, or other areas where they excel in, such as game design, rather than on hardware.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[BVis]

All I know it isn't powerful enough to do HD output something both the original xbox and ps2 were able to do.

Sure, the PS2 could (and can) do 480p output. In my book, that's not HD, since it's the same resolution as a DVD. By way of comparison, if you have an HDTV monitor, you've probably noticed how lousy Fox HD shows look as compared to other networks. This is because Fox does 480p widescreen, and at least on my HDTV (Sony Grand Wega III 42" LCD rear projector) it looks significantly noisier than other, higher-resolution sources.

Of course, this is also predicated on your being able to find the Sony-policy-proprietary-bullshit connector to give you component video out. It's on amazon.com if you want it, but I've never seen it in a brick-and-mortar store.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[zerocool^]

I mean, why are those numbers complete crap?

All due respect, apples and bowling balls, Tony.

Different architectures. If someone gave you 2 computers to review, and one had a Pentium-M 1.4Ghz and a Cyrix 2.0 Ghz, which one is faster? Or, what about an AMD K6-2 450 vs a Pentium III 450 Mhz? They have the same capabilities, right?

The article spits out megahertzes and whatits, but doesn't mention any benchmarks or anything like that, which are the true measure of the capabilities of the system.

~Will

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[ChildeRoland]

The Cube could do progressive output as well. I doubt that this Revolution won't do it.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

the article wasn't trying to measure the performance of different consoles. why would they? they don't have access to test machines. he was making a point that the focus wasn't on hardware. a point which you seemed to have missed.

and the difference in clockspeeds is staggering. the 360's clockspeed is more than 4x the clockspeed of the revolution's CPU, in addition to having more cores than the revolution. that itself should tell you something no matter how the performance for each chip scales with clockspeed. this is same generation hardware designed by companies which are are frontrunners of the industry.we're not comparing cyrix with pentium. IBM designed the Broadway CPU, and was also part of the effort behind the Cell processor. There's not much of a technology gap in between the companies involved.

No one is saying that the 360 is 400% faster than the revolution, but it is definitely faster. If the clockspeeds were only different by a margin of 20-30% it'd be another story. But the revolution clearly isn't trying to compete with the raw hardware power of the other consoles.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, very irresponsible, journalists should never say anything until they've cleared it with Big Corporation.

u r a m0r0n

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Reread the GGGP's post, you missed his point.

Reread the GP's post, you missed his point too.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

well, if their point was that they could counter a strawman argument they've constructed with no relation to the article, then perhaps I did miss the point of that. perhap you want to elucidate things for me, then?

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Duds]

The numbers don't tell any story. He's claiming a PIII based chip is as quick for its mhz as a PowerPC based design.

That's quite clearly bollocks before we start.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Gizzmonic]

All I know it isn't powerful enough to do HD output something both the original xbox and ps2 were able to do.

Not the PS2. And as for the Xbox-Doom 3 and the Halo games are about the only games that use it. Developers didn't get good performance in HD res without heavy optimization-and they are running into this problem with the Xbox 360 as well.

Progressive scan (480p) will be an option on the Rev, and it will mean silky smooth framerates at a lower resolution, instead of the same old interlaced crap at higher resolution (1080i). It should be gorgeous-unless you're a complete HD freak that won't even watch DVDs anymore.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Headcase88]

Yeah, maybe grandparent has a strange sense of sarcasm or something because it astounds me that anyone would think that the Revo wouldn't use the same network as the DS, even if it wasn't officially confirmed, which it was.

In some ways, the DS is Nintendo's warm-up for the Revo. And this is one of those ways.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[chrnb]

I think the graphics probably won't be too different, considering HD vs. SD and all. But What is gonna suffer is the physics.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[GrumblyStuff]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. The PS2 version of SC2 CHOKED on the graphics.

What people (and me) are getting tired of is this stupid jerkfest over MHz. Maybe the author didn't mean to make a comparison but he did by putting in the specs of the Xbox.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone has to admit that Matt could have connections with developers who could leak information about the Revolution but because they're anonymous and the specs make no sense when you look at other information you have to doubt the source.

The fact is that UBIsoft has already announced several titles which run on the XBox 360, PS3 and Revolution exclusively (that is they don't exist on previous generation platforms) that are to be released in November 2006 (there was a splinter cell as well as a Rainbow 6 game) one could assume that the differences between the systems was not that great (no larger than PS2-XBox, or at worst Dreamcast-XBox). On top of that several developers who have gotten their hands on the dev-kits have claimed that 2-4 times as powerful would be a 'conservative estimate'.

I'm not saying that Matt is lying, but I am saying that several sites who could have inside information have all had very different leaked specifications; many of those sites had people who understand technical specifications far better than Matt give their impressions and the specifications that they 'leaked' came far closer to WHAT DEVELOPERS WERE ACTUALLY SAYING ABOUT THE SYSTEM

There is one way to be certain though, start a web petition that states that IGN should fire Matt (or he should resign) if the real specifications Nintendo announces (probably at E3) are much different then his own. If his source is trustworthy he'll agree and be safe, if its not he will either agree to and then face quiting in a couple of months (and we will be rid of him) or he will not agree to and it will show that he is willing to spread baseless rumors to feel cool (like the average 15 year old blogger).

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[lysergic.acid]

I agree with you that just comparing clock speeds could give people the wrong impression. But to the author's credit, atleast he mentioned that raw figures like that don't give the entire picture. He was just raising the point that the leaked specs--which included memory specs also (and performance does scale more predictably with the amount of memory available)--do seem to support the idea that nintendo isn't waging a war with the other consoles on the technology front. I don't understand why so many people are having a hard time believing this when in the first sentence the author writes:

Nintendo president Satoru Iwata has said that his company is not interested in waging a technology war against Microsoft and Sony, whose next generation consoles promise more power and in turn high-definition graphics.

It's like no one even reads TFA.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, a Pentium 3 is more than capable clock-per-clock with many processors in the PowerPC family. Without any information about the CPU internals, being a PowerPC processor simply indicates family of closely related ISAs. Were this a VLIW processor the ISA might play a more significant role, but the PowerPC ISAs other than being drastically less dense than the P3 ISA doesn't really matter here. If we assume that Gekko is the basis for Broadway, if the clock scaling occurs without increasing the pipeline significantly it should compare favorably to the neutered Coppermine in the XBox. Otherwise the processor really isn't going to be all that impressive.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again.

[Anonymous Coward]

All three consoles could do HD up to at least 1080i (which has almost no bandwidth difference from 480p, and is actually identical in bandwidth requirements to 540p). GameCube software was simply never written to output at that res (likely because of the size restrictions of the media format), and likely neither will Revolution.

Besides, ever see Gran Turismo 4 on PS2 in 1080i? It's still a jagfest, simply at higher res. Likewise, Soul Calibur 3 in 720p on Xbox was a framerate slug compared to 1080i and 480p modes. The devs tested at those resolutions and released them anyway, and neither the PS2 nor the Xbox were advertised as "HD consoles." Revolution is in the same boat, although Nintendo is simply dismissing the "HD console" moniker so nobody gets the idea that they are marketing HD-level graphics performance as a selling point for the Revolution.

In short, power has nothing to do with it. Remind yourself: Even an ancient Riva 128 can output graphics at higher than 640x480. Revolution surpasses, at the absolute least (and by probably a huge degree), GeForce 4-level graphics, and it will only have to worry about 640x480, non-interlaced. It's going to be beautiful - to deny that possibility is to say that this generation was composed of only ugly-looking games, which would be the biggest troll anybody could inflict in this thread.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[future assassin]

honestly, most Nintendo games are aimed at younger kids anyway (Mario Party, etc.)

This might be so BUT for me I preffer to play games like Mario Kart Double Dash then some 3D shootem up or "life like" racing games. I'll play those games but I rather have fun playing the game then get a rush playing the game.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Justin205]

They aren't aimed 'at' younger kids... They're aimed at casual gamers, more. They're good fun, and many can be played from anyone between about 5 years old and someone who's near-dead.

Just because a game gets an "E" rating doesn't mean people over 13 can't play it...

Game consoles aren't all about powerful hardware

[Zweideutig]

How much can you expect from a sub $1000 USD mass produced, proprietary (not necessarly a bad thing) box? I'm not much of a gamer, but I believe the focus of new generations of gaming consoles is not simply to increase graphics quality. The idea is to provide a computer to play the game that the game designers can be (usually) sure won't play pirated games out of box. This gives companies an incentive to invest in new innovative game for the game console. It is about making companies feel good about investing time to write innovative games, not to provide the latest graphics capabilities.

2X?!

[Wootzor von Leetenha]

That's good enough for me. I'm pretty much still in awe of the gamecube. It's this little f@#%@ing thing that rocks, kinda like my mac mini. I don't have a X360 but will get a PS3, so I haven't seen "incredible, PC like" graphics on a console yet. Hell, I'm still in awe when I fire up Shadowrun on my Genesis! It's all about gameplay, I can live without graphics on consoles.

Re:2X?!

[HAKdragon]

I can live without graphics on consoles.

===================Super Mario Bros.=================

You've emerged from a giant green pipe. A large castle lies in the distance. Giant blocks with question marks painted on them float mystically in mid-air. A large turtle with a green shell is approaching you from left. From your right, what appears to be a giant mushroom with eyes and legs approaches.

>_

Re:2X?!

[tktk]

r, r, r, jump, r, jump, jump ...

Screw this, I'm loading up tintin++.

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

===================Super Mario Bros.=================

You've emerged from a giant green pipe. A large castle lies in the distance. Giant blocks with question marks painted on them float mystically in mid-air. A large turtle with a green shell is approaching you from left. From your right, what appears to be a giant mushroom with eyes and legs approaches.

>_

>hop on mushroom

I don't know how to do that.

>kill mushroom

what do you want to kill it with?

>jump on mushroon

there is no mushroon here

Before you have a chance to react the giant mushroom walks into you killing you instantly, you fall of the edge of the world.

Retry(Yes/No/Quit)?

===================
Yeah thats pretty much how I remember it, of course my dog had chewed on the d-pad so I tended to get "intermittant" responsivness.

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hands down, that's the funniest comment I've read on Slashdot in months!

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

I put on my robe and wizard hat.

Re:2X?!

[hedleyroos]

If I had modpoints I'd mod you all the way up to 10!

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Melt the turtle and mushroom by throwing thermal pods.

Re:2X?!

[VJ42]

This being slashdot, I expect somones gone to start coding it already. I know I'd play it; I still love text based games.

Re:2X?!

[Zedrick]

I've been looking for ideas for a future text-adventure. This is brilliant, thank you.

Re:2X?!

[Wootzor von Leetenha]

I said graphics not video :-P

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is why I still play on my N64 from time to time. It's about gameplay, and Nintendo appear to be the only one who've realised that.

Re:2X?!

[SynapseLapse]

Wow... that's really odd. I've been playing Mario games for over two decades now. And until right now, when I read your post it never occurred to me how really quite odd it is that the question blocks and bricks just... float in the air for no reason. They just sit there much in the way flowers just sit on the ground. Its odd how you can really miss the forest for the trees. I guess when you've been around something since you're a kid, it just sort of becomes normal for blocks to float in the air. I kind of wonder how many gaming conventions we accept as normal, our kids and their kids will find ludicrous? Like bodies that disappear, items that simply vanish when you touch them, etc.

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent!

Re:2X?!

[Guppy06]

You are likely to be eaten by a koopa.

Re:2X?!

[Short Circuit]

Where're the Cheetos?

Re:2X?!

[spiderbitendeath]

Can I have a Mountain Dew?

Re:2X?!

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't know this until recently, but the goombas actually aren't supposed to be evil mushrooms. They're supposed to be chestnuts. I didn't even know what a chestnut looked like.

Re:2X?!

[ZzzzSleep]

Quoth VJ42

This being slashdot, I expect somones gone to start coding it already. I know I'd play it; I still love text based games.

In the meantime... try this.

Re:2X?!

[plenTpak]

http://plentpak.net/smb.html

I don't know if i'll ever finish it though, heh. But the code is all there, so someone else could, if he wanted to!

Just like old times

[Infidel666]

The company has ALWAYS been about revolutionizing controllers - from the NES, to SNES up through the 64 & Gamecube.

Re:Just like old times

[trolleymusic]

The n64 was an awesome console with an awesome controller. An analog stick, standard on all controllers, genius. Ever since then a D-pad has felt so wrong.

Re:Just like old times

[alc6379]

The n64 was an awesome console with an awesome controller. An analog stick, standard on all controllers, genius. Ever since then a D-pad has felt so wrong. While I will agree that it had some great features, I have to say that the N64 controller was one of the most uncomfortable controllers I've used. Maybe it's because I have large hands, but the "grips" on the ends of the controllers felt too thin, and that ended up making the controller's top feel too "flat" when playing fighting/wrestling games. I remember while playing one of the early THQ WWF games (I think it was Smack Down!, but I'm not sure), I had to quit playing after about 15 minutes of play, because my right hand was aching from the repetitive button mashing the game required.

It could just be that WWF games sucked back then(SHOCKER!), but any time I had to smash those A/B buttons repetitively in any N64 game, I got that ache, and would have to stop playing for around an hour or so. Aside from that, I think the N64 controller really helped bring some features like the analog joystick and the "Rumble Pack" into modern console gaming.

don't give up yet

[Anonymous Coward]

seems to me that most people that posted so far, really haven't gone to deep looking into this thing. its, a risk of course. but if you read some of the hands on experiences, they said that you don't need to move your arm all over the place, its just like a mouse, just small, quick movements of the wrist. i think thats what nintendo was trying to get at, a console mouse that wasn't a mouse. also saying that repackaging the gamecube with a new controller could be also made for the 360, repackaging the games with better graphics. all it really needs is time and open minds

Re:Innovative?

[Doytch]

Yeah, hiiiii, I'm afraid I'm going to have to go ahead and, uhhh, ask you to hand over your geek identification card.

It's Link dammit, not Zelda.

Re:Innovative?

[Manchot]

The protagonist of the Legend of Zelda series is named Link. Zelda is the princess that he often rescues.

Graphics

[Shifty Jim]

"However, few would disagree with the assertion that Resident Evil 4 - a title developed from the ground-up for Nintendo's system -- was one of the prettiest games of the generation."

Yeah... Because "pretty" is the first word that comes to any one's mind when they hear "Resident Evil."

Re:Graphics

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty... ugly.
But hey, it looked neat, just not my type of game.

Re:Graphics

[svip]

Make it 'pretty damn awful voice acting' and you're right.

Re:Graphics

[Loktar Ogar]

Did anyone else just yell "Leon!" in that annoying girl voice of awesome?

Better games are the real important issue.

[Anonymous Coward]

nintendo has alyways made sure that their games are better.

i think it will hold true to this console. i still like pokemon and zelda. call me childish all you will, but they were good games, regardless of the system it was run on.

Seriously, i look at the xbox 360 games, and theres nothing there that excites me. just all this stupid crap that tries to emulate real life. thats not why i play video games, i play them to excape from real life. at least nintendo has an art style.

Re:Better games are the real important issue.

[Belgand]

The problem with both Xboxes (in my mind at least) is that the vast majority of games for them are either ports of PC games or are cross-platform titles. Ignoring the obvious console vs. PC arguments it's just not that compelling of a platform. If I were to take the opposite approach - an XBox, but no PC - I'd be missing out on a lot of really great PC-only titles. Most of the best Nintendo games on the other hand (and, I'll admit, many PS2 games) are exlcusive to their console. With a Gamecube and a PC I feel like I'm missing out only on those games for the PS2 that I'd like to play with one of the most notable PS2 series, GTA3, readily available on the PC with a higher frame rate and, IMHO, better controls.

Re:Better games are the real important issue.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the same way I feel. I havn't gotten a new system since SNes but I might get a Revolution. I like a few games on the 360 but I can't justify buying one for 2 games I like. If the Revolution will allow downloading and playing of the old NES titles then I know already that I would have plenty of games that I would enjoy. Now we just have to wait for a price.

Re:Better games are the real important issue.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with you, bro. Hi fidelity graphics can detract from the quality of the game experience, because the dev team has a lot more work to do finessing fine visual details that really do little to enhance the actual game experience. Time that could be spent inventing creative gameplay details, etc. Realism is cool, but there are real advantages to being a generation behind the nosebleed crowd.

Re:Better games are the real important issue.

[bytor4232]

heh, I still play Kirby's Dreamland and SMB. A good game is a good game.

Re:Better games are the real important issue.

[Blakey Rat]

Oblivion and Kameo have quite distinct graphic styles. Arguably, by emulating good war movies/detective movies, so do Call of Duty 2 and Condemned. And there's a lot of games coming out soon that have a very unique look to them... look into Blue Dragon, for instance.

And of course, realism *is* an art style, whether you like it or not.

Nobody cares

[globalar]

I am not a gamer (no real time for that), but sometimes I want to play a not-to-involved game. There were only two reasons I bought a gamecube:

1) It was cheap (only $100 with controller and a game, if I recall correctly)
2) It had some fun games (Metroid, Zelda, Mario, the usual)

I knew next to nothing else about the thing. I think more about ordering a meal at a resturant than I did about this purchase. Now, my PC is a different story, but consoles are for recreation. Keep it simple, cheap, and fun please.

Re:Nobody cares

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes and yes.

I bought a coupe of DS for my sons. Because they were less expensive, seemed more robust, last very long on batteries, had fun games that are less expensive than PSP, and are compatible with GBA game library.

I don't give a f*ck about the horsepower inside (only indirectly, as less HP means cheaper, longer batteries, games less expensive to produce)

Now, as I am a nerd, I looked at inside specs after that, and well, it is a dual core assymetric ARM9+ARM7, and, with the help of a SuperCard and a PassMe, I started programming the things for fun.

But specs were NOT in my purchase decision.

Re:Nobody cares

[xtracto]

I am not a gamer (no real time for that), but sometimes I want to play a not-to-involved game... 2) It had some fun games (Metroid, Zelda, Mario, the usual)

Uhh, I don't *exactly* know about GC, but I have played Zelda for Nintendo 64 and it seems pretty involving, as and adventure game (at least in Zelda for N64) you had to spend something like an hour after starting the game to find some meaning to it.

Anyway I like Nintendo games for that reason too, I usually play pokemon arena (for N64, is it the one similar to Puyo Pop??) and Mario Kart, as they are very easy to play and you do not need to spend a lot of time.

By the way, there is a little game called Hogs of War for the Playstation1 which is a Worms-like multiplayer game. I have been playing it with my flatmate (both of us are doing our PhD, although he is in his mid 30's and he is a NON-PLAYER by nature). I showed the game to my girlfriend and my flatmate and we have passed great time. We play it on EPSXE but the three of us can play with just one controller (it is turn based).

OTOH I sometimes play mario party with my girlfriend... I am waiting to buy another controller (I only have two) to be able to play with her and my flatmate.

Those are Nintendo games, they are for the family, they are easy to play. That is why I am waiting for the revolution, I will *surely* buy it when arrives, as I am sure everybody at my flat will enjoy it (including me of course hoho) and I am certain that it will have those kind of games which I can enjoy playing 30 mintues only.

Innovation

[xamomike]

I welcome Nintendo's new console, it's not just about the fine detail or how many poly's the gpu can process per second... it's about game innovation, and Nintendo has always had well branded games that kids like. I've been impressed with some of the games on the Gamecube, even if it is slower than hell by spec. The fact is they have good selection of games kids love to play, and even some of us older folks. I currently own an XBox 360, PS2, and a Gamecube. My kids play the gamecube more than the others because they enjoy the games more.

Re:Innovation

[Soul-Burn666]

It's still a bit annoying that people link the GC to "kiddy gaming".
Sure the GC has Mario and Zelda and such, but I can't call Metroid Prime kiddy, nor can I say the same about RE4, Eternal Darkness, Ikaruga or Killer7.
The fact the system has many games kids like AND the parents don't mind their children playing, doesn't mean an adult can't enjoy the system.
Not to say an adult can't enjoy the "kiddy" games.

More so on the Rev with the "fun for the whole family stick".
I'm waiting for the news feature saying it's the next big thing for old people due to its simplicity.

SFW?

[WasterDave]

I thought this was one of the few things we "knew" about the revolution? Nintendo have been quite open about not joining the 360/PS3 horsepower bandwagon, and also quite open about not giving a toss about HD. Between that, the prospect of downloadable titles, significant efforts to make it friendlier to non gamers (hey, I *like* the controller) and Nintendo's history of being the best at producing cheaply it looks like they may be going to make really quite a bit of coin this time around.

Coin? Ha! B'ding! B'ding! B'ding!

Dave

Re:SFW?

[westlake]

not giving a toss about HD

The problem is, HD isn't going away. It is in ten to fifteen per cent of households now.

When Walmart positions the X-Box 360 as the natural compliment to the big screen home theater experience it's just possible that the console market is changing.

Re:SFW?

[Rydia]

And has been growing at... what? 1% a year? So it'll be around 20-30% at the most when the revolution is dead. And a large number of people are buying HD TVs simply because that's what people are selling, and, simply, don't give a toss about HD.

After all these wonderful stories this week, I think I'll simply rename "videogame industry" to "tail wag dog." That's all that seems to be going on nowadays, trying to make markets want what we want them to want, trying to force a standard onto the market simply in order to establish said standard, and a million other silly little deluded things. I get the feeling the designers have out-muscled the MBAs, and that is not always a good thing.

Re:SFW?

[Anonymous Coward]

*shrugs* Nothings stopping Nintendo from releasing a HD edition a year or so later when demand goes up and costs come down, much like the Nintendo DS Lite.

Re:SFW?

[SeeMyNuts!]

"It is in ten to fifteen per cent of households now."

Given the rocky adoption of HD, it seems pretty risky to set up these ultra-high-power consoles to be suitable to only 15% of customers. That's a lot of expensive hardware for people who cannot utilize those CPUs, and spending even more on HDTV sets, cables, etc. just to get a video game console to work to its potential seems pretty far fetched. That's potentially $1,500 or more just for video games. Isn't there supposed to be a college fund in there somewhere?

Re:SFW?

[moosesocks]

Speaking of college, my roommates and I are dedicated to the N64. One of us owns a gamecube.

In the college demographic, I'd say that there a ridiculous number of N64s, a fair number of gamecubes, and a handful of XBoxes that are only used to play Halo.

Face it. Nintendo's cheap, and they've got the games that are the most fun to play in a large group. Super Smash Bros is the ultimate party game. Mario Kart 64 is elegant in its simplicity and replayability.

Re:SFW?

[mgblst]

Why even release a new console then? Why not stick to the old one, maybe upgrade it somehow... I know, make it smaller (works for Playstation). Add in new controls for it.

Re:SFW?

[jfftck]

One thing that I keep hearing is that there are a lot of games just scaling the graphics up to HD from progressive scan and not making them truly HD. So, it is not like all the games you get for the 360 are really HD, and many people are comparing the graphics to the X-Box and not seeing this big jump that they were told they would get. I would wait to see if the pattern of porting games changes after PS3 and there are 2 HD systems. I think Nintendo was correct for sitting 1 more generation out for HD, the hardware that they are going with is going to put them right up with the 360 in fps.

Re:SFW?

[EoinOL]

And has been growing at... what? 1% a year? So it'll be around 20-30% at the most when the revolution is dead.

That's assuming that the growth rate remains constant for that period of time, which is quite a dubious thing to assume. The range of HDTVs is increasing, the price is dropping, and awareness of the existence of HD is growing. Sooner or later most people going to buy a new TV will know that HD exists and that it's better, and they'll find that there's a large range of HDTVs to choose from, some of them at very close to the price of what they may have been planning to buy anyway. The HD takeup rate is very shortly going to significantly accelerate - and it's quite likely that gamers in general are going to own a disproportionate number of those HDTVs.

Re:SFW?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, HD isn't going away. It is in ten to fifteen per cent of households now.

But most games consoles aren't hooked up to the home's biggest TV. They are set up in bedrooms or dens, etc.

When most kids have a HDTV in their bedroom, then the Rev will have an issue.

Re:SFW?

[zerocool^]

Speaking of B'ding B'ding, you have seen this right? http://www.ebaumsworld.com/marioguitar.html

Check out the coin noises.

Re:SFW?

[zerocool^]

What's the cheapest HDVT?

See, I'm in the market for a new TV (my wife and I have a 20" weee tv now, so anything is an upgrade). I look at the stores, and everyone says HD is affordable... but then, I see a nice 36" tube TV for $300. I haven't seen an HDTV bigger than 24 or so inches for less than $1000... maybe I haven't looked in a long time, but, the fact is me and a whole bunch of other americans aren't going to shell out $1500 for a TV.

~W

Re:SFW?

[SirDaShadow]

I got a Sanyo 32" 4:3 for $300 at value city. Not the best monitor, but HDTV broadcasts look really nice. It has composite, component, svideo and HDMI inputs plus two tuners, one normal NTSC and one ATSC (hd) compatible with cable or antenna reception. Good for people who want to get their feet wet but don't want to spend a lot of money on HD.

Re:SFW?

[toph42]

Phillips has a 26" widescreen TV that is HD-ready for $259: http://tinyurl.com/zkpto [links through to Froogle]

Re:SFW?

[AaronBrethorst]

I just purchased a 32" LCD at Costco for $999 on Monday. Considering that I upgraded from a 25" non-flat CRT which I paid $250 for a few years back, I feel like I got my money's worth. As other posters have pointed out, you can certainly purchase a hi-def CRT for not that much more than an SD CRT.

Re:SFW?

[Queer Boy]

HD does NOT make a game better.

Re:SFW?

[WasterDave]

No! I saw the one played on a 12 string (but have lost the URL, sorry).

Nice, thanks.

Dave

Re:SFW?

[westlake]

Given the rocky adoption of HD, it seems pretty risky to set up these ultra-high-power consoles to be suitable to only 15% of customers.

RCA introduced all-electronic color in 1954. It took ten years for color tv to become mass market and RCA and NBC were out there alone.

In one leap, HD buyers are moving to big-screen, wide-screen projection, high-definition video and multichannel digital television sound---and they are paying Walmart prices to get there. That 21" RCA color tv set of the mid-fifties cost $1100 uninflated post-war dollars.

Ten times the price of B/W from Mad Man Muntz.

Re:SFW?

[SeeMyNuts!]

In 1954, color TV was revolutionary. In 2006, HDTV is evolutionary. HDTV is at least ten years in the making, based on a TV show I remember from the early 1990s, and I'm still not certain of HDTV's ability to get the penetration that regular TV has. Time will tell, of course.

Re:SFW?

[myster0n]

Here, read this : "On a global basis, by the end of 2010 the number of HD ready households will reach 174m or 22% of TV households. The figure will be 59% in the US, 66% in Japan and 30% in Western Europe."

If these figures come true, I think Nintendo can afford to hold off HD until their next console.

Re:Innovative?

[youknowmewell]

There's a reason that console controllers have evolved into their current form, and that's because they are ergonomic and comfortable.

I think what you meant was "and that's because Nintendo leads the way every time."

Control Stick? That was Nintendo. Rumble [pack]? That was Nintendo. Next to add to that list? Wireless controllers with motion sensors using a nunchuck design.

Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[thinmac]

Reading the article, it seems like most of their "horsepower" statements were just backed up with the clock rate of each systems CPU and GPU. That, really, doesn't mean anything at all. Who cares if the Revolution's CPU is clocked twice as fast as the GameCube's? That doesn't really mean anything at all, unless they're both running exactly the same chip just clocked at different rates. The same thing is true of comparing the XBox 360's 3.2 GHz chip to the Revolution's 750-ish MHz CPU. Does that really tell us anything at all? Not really.

The article is mostly crap. It's just telling us that the clock speed of Nintendo's apples isn't as fast as Microsoft's oranges.

Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[DigitlDud]

Nintendo systems have always had underpowered main processors, going back to the NES. Then they throw loads of custom chips on top of everything.

The SNES had its unique "color math" capabilities and the famous Mode7 affine matrix transformation mode.

I believe the N64 let you re-write the microcode in the GPU for custom needs.

The Gamecube, had lots of unique graphical capabilities like an indirect texture unit. SGI workstations are about the only machines that had indirect texturing. You can do lots of cool effects like fake light refraction and psuedo-3D geometry.

Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[stonedonkey]

Reading the article, it seems like most of their "horsepower" statements were just backed up with the clock rate of each systems CPU and GPU. That, really, doesn't mean anything at all. Who cares if the Revolution's CPU is clocked twice as fast as the GameCube's? That doesn't really mean anything at all, unless they're both running exactly the same chip just clocked at different rates.

Bingo! You win a free toaster.

Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[Dwedit]

The NES was more powerful than the original Apple II*, and more powerful than the ZX Spectrum**. I wouldn't exactly call that "underpowered".

* Same clock speed, but the NES has better graphics hardware
** A 4MHz Z80 runs at approximately the same speed as a 1MHz 6502. The Spectrum had a 3.5MHz Z80.

Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[Dehumanizer]

The Spectrum's CPU was much faster than the C64's. The latter had graphically amazing games due to hardware sprites, but in terms of raw CPU, the Speccy was faster. Look at games like Driller or Elite, where sprites can't help - they were much smoother on the Speccy.

Re:Clock Rates Aren't Horsepower

[DigitlDud]

I'm pretty sure the Apple IIs also ran a 6502 like the NES except it was clocked slightly higher. Also the NES 6502 was completely lacking a decimal mode. Regardless, its a 1970s-era chip being used in 1984 into the 90s, likely for its cheapness.

The specs are fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

If they can make a game like Metroid Prime: Hunters for the DS to look that good on pretty much a portable Nintendo 64, then I would like to see what they can do with a revolution.

Quality technical writing.

[ameoba]

I love the author's impliciaction that The revolution's 729MHz PPC is somehow going to be slower than the 733MHz Celeron that runs the original XBox (and the silent implication that the 3-way 3.2GHz chip in the 360 is meaninffully comparable to either of these on clock-speed alone) .

We're dealing with a real technical powerhouse here and he's giving us some insighful hardware analysis.

Mirror?

[Anonymous Coward]

I must be having DNS problems... I'm having trouble connecting to most anything... Slashdot, Google, and Wikipedia are about it. Can someone post it here?

Re:Mirror?

[svip]

Executive summary: "I like the Xbox. I like the Xbox 360. These arbitrary comparisons of apples and oranges I pulled out of my ass prove the Revolution will suck. Also I have a big penis."

Different processors

[ggareau]

Is it just me, or are they completely ignoring that the Gamecube had a PPC chip, and Xbox had an x86 chip?

On paper clock speed doesn't put the Revolution between the Gamecube and Xbox. It easily puts it above.

Also, if I recall correctly, the 360 and PS3's processors need to be passed data sequentially, and because of that it makes it much harder to avoid bottlenecks and lag in code, whereas the Revolution's does not.

It could just be me, but looking at stats on paper mean nothing when you're comapring different architectures and chipsets.

Controller will make or break the Rev

[Anonymous Coward]

The controller is either going to make or break the Revolution. It will be interesting to watch the launch and the few months after, but I get the feeling that the one handed controller's movement detection system will be flawed and difficult to use. I don't really like the Xbox 360 and the PS3 doesn't excite me either. I tried playing a Nintendo DS but I don't like having to control games with a stupid touch stick.

Guess I'm just shit out of luck.

Pixels to push

[Adelph]

Nintendo has made clear their intent _not_ to support hi-def formats on the Revolution, whereas MS and Sony are heavily marketing the 1080i capabilities of their respective consoles. One theory for the viability of this relatively small increase in graphics power: with much fewer pixels to push, the Revolution's hardware will be able to produce framerates similar to what the Xbox360 and PS3 can do in hi-def. And on a non-HDTV, a game on all three consoles may end up looking the same.

this is crap.

[SetupWeasel]

From the article:

Whether or not Revolution is, in fact, a vehicle for the new freestyle controller or not, systems specs rarely tell the whole story. We would remind readers that during an era when polygon numbers meant everything, GameCube's polygon peaks were lower than PlayStation 2 and Xbox. However, few would disagree with the assertion that Resident Evil 4 - a title developed from the ground-up for Nintendo's system -- was one of the prettiest games of the generation.

That is blatantly untrue. GameCube's published specs were lower, but they weren't the same theoretical specs that MS and Sony spewed out. Reportedly Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike had the highest polygon count of the current generation at something like 18 million/sec.

Re:this is crap.

[Mr_eX9]

The GameCube pumped out some remarkably good graphics on some games, like Rogue Leader, Rebel Strike, the Metroid Primes, RE4, etc.

Just goes to show how little these tech specs matter. MS and Sony are just touting their teraflops and gigahertz because they can. I doubt more than 1% of the gaming world even knows what a flop is--I sure don't. It's all just hype.

Re:this is crap.

[Anonymous Coward]

beauty is relative

Re:this is crap.

[Anonymous Coward]

>Reportedly Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike had the highest polygon count of the current generation at something like 18 million/sec.

Are you on crack? I love my GameCube like the next guy, but Xbox's hardware owns it in poly power, resolution, texturing, lighting, audio, and storage capacity. There's no arguing with that. But Rebel Strike perfectly illustrates the point that graphics can't save a game from mediocrity. Katamari Damacy or Guitar Freaks demonstrate how originality can save the day.

Re:this is crap.

[Jozer99]

I guess it would be pretty hard to do, but someone should really do a through test of the three next-gen (are they current gen tech now, or are we living in the future?) consoles. I'm not talking game play, but benchmarking with various floating point, memory bandwidth, bus speed, and polygon tests, as objectively as possible. That would certainly settle some questions. I do believe that Revolution will be less powerful than XBox360 and PS3, but I don't think that matters much. With XBox360 costing $400 (the real version, not the lite one) and some reports (probably false) of an $800 PS3, its nice to see a console for $150. Plus, Nintendo has always been big on gameplay, not graphics (SNES vs. PSX, NES vs. Genisis, ect...). Just look at the DS. Its wimpy compared to the PSP, but is still sold out years after launch, while the PSP languishes on shelves. If Nintendo can do the same for the living-room console, they can rest assured of a healthy chunk of console sales.

Re:this is crap.

[koolman2]

Not to be picky, but the SNES wasn't competing with the PSX. The N64 and PSX fought.

NES vs Master System
SNES vs Genisis
N64 vs PSX
DC vs PS2
PS2 vs Xbox vs GCN

Re:this is crap.

[BenjyD]

Indeed - much of the time, the quality of the game's artists is more important than the number of polygons per second.

Re:this is crap.

[masklinn]

He never said that Rebel Strike was a good game, he said that Rebel Strike had the highest poly count while running on the system with the (officially) lowest poly fillrate of the generation.

Re:this is crap.

[Jozer99]

Ya, but the N64 came out 2-3 years AFTER then PSX (1994 vs 1996).

Re:this is crap.

[koolman2]

It doesn't matter - they were both still the same generation of console.

start a revolution

[intthis]

while i do think that loads of power, like the ps3 / 360, is awesome... the main reason i'm so anxious for the revolution is to play the old games... so i, for one, don't need mountains of horsepower... i'm just looking to get games like chrono trigger and secret of mana (hopefully square will be good about the licensing) so i can leave my carts on the shelf... because i don't want to think about replacing them (as a sealed chrono trigger recently sold on ebay for $550...)

The same argument...

[straterpatrick]

This is exactly the same story that came out when DS and PSP specs were announced. PSP is so much more powerful and DS is for kids, etc... But look at how well the DS is doing. Not that it is blowing away the competition but I don't think anyone expects the Revolution to "beat" 360/PS3. Nintendo just needs to recover from Gamecube's failure and grow it's user base. If Revolution is anything like the DS then I think they will do quite well.

Re:The same argument...

[syntheros]

Gamecube was a failure? Sure, I guess when you're the ONLY console of the generation turning a profit... yah, that could be failure.

Re:The same argument...

[Tyger]

If they keep putting out "failures" like the Game Cube, they will be sitting pretty.

Re:The same argument...

[Anonymous Coward]

The "failure" was in the loss of consumer base I'd guess. As for the only console turning a profit, the other two companies make back money on licensing (okay, maybe Microsoft is still losing money even with that).

Re:The same argument...

[DrWho520]

Please define failure. I think we use different dictionaries.

Re:The same argument...

[Queer Boy]

Nintendo just needs to recover from Gamecube's failure

Um, how was Gamecube a failure? Just because it wasn't #1? Ever sales figure I have seen for Gamecube and XBox numbers puts them at about even (making them a tie for DISTANT second). So Nintendo sells about as many units as Microsoft, and makes money on all of them while Microsoft LOSES money on every XBox ever sold, and Nintendo is a failure??

Wow, I wish I could come up with a failed product like that.

Re:The same argument...

[Snowspinner]

By GC's failure you mean the console that was profitable for them, right?

GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[tepples]

The company has ALWAYS been about revolutionizing controllers - from the NES, to SNES up through the 64 & Gamecube.

I'll give you NES, Super NES, and N64, but not GameCube. The GameCube controller is just the Dual Shock with no L1, L3, R3, or Select buttons, and the D-pad and left stick are switched, and the L2 and R2 are analog like on the Dreamcast controller and Dual Shock 2.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[daddyrief]

'The GameCube controller is just the Dual Shock with no L1, L3, R3, or Select buttons, and the D-pad and left stick are switched, and the L2 and R2 are analog like on the Dreamcast controller and Dual Shock 2.'

...Sounds pretty different to me.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Manchot]

If not the standard Gamecube controller, what about the Wavebird (wireless) controller? It was the industry's first reliable wireless controller.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Loktar Ogar]

If you can picture holding any other controller when you hold a gamecube controller, then you are nuts. Looking at that sentence I put my GC controller into my pants and I thought of my nuts.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[MMaestro]

The GameCube controller is just the Dual Shock with no L1, L3, R3, or Select buttons, and the D-pad and left stick are switched, and the L2 and R2 are analog like on the Dreamcast controller and Dual Shock 2.

Wow, two extra shoulder buttons and the ability to press down on the analog sticks (which almost no game uses because you can't hold them down while pushing at full force) suddenly makes a superior controller? Keeping the D-pad as a primary means of control was a mistake from the get-go, every serious gamer realized that when the N64 showcased Goldeneye and even Nintendo has stated that they simply kept the D-pad for the N64 because developers asked for it. The shoulder buttons on the Gamecube are analog as well, developers just don't use them too often because it leads to confusion over control setups. ("How hard do I press down?")

If you really want to nitpick, Sony simply ripped off Nintendo's controller design from the beginning. The ORIGINAL PS1 controller had no analog sticks, it was a knock-off SNES controller with two extra shoulder buttons. The Dual Shock simply added two analog sticks, which most developers refused to support at first in fear of alienating those who refused to update. The Dual Shock 2 was an insult, basicly being nothing more than another update with many gamers (rightfully) simply buying dirt cheap Dual Shock 1 controllers for the PS1 and plugging them into their PS2s.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[GunFodder]

Have you actually held a Gamecube controller? It's nothing like a PS DualShock controller. In addition to the numerous changes you mentioned the right thumb buttons are different sizes. All these changes mean that generally the most commonly used controls are right under your thumb/finger, and you can easily tell the difference between every control by touch. The PS controller is reasonably comfortable, but since all the buttons are so similar it is really easy to get them confused when you are playing a new game.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[fupeg]

No, what made the Gamecube's controller awesome was its ergonomics. The controller just fit better in your hand. The different sized buttons were also great. It's great having the over-sized A button since that's what you press the most, at least in most games. I remember picking up the Gamecube's controller for the first time, and then picking up the Xbox's controller. It was like comparing a modern cell phone with one from the early 90's.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Belgand]

Never knew for certain if the Gamecube's shoulder button were full-on analog since, as you stated, I've rarely seen a game demonstrate this to any noticeable degree. I think the clever thing they did with this was give the analog sticks two obvious levels of pressure: light pressure where the button goes in a bit and fully-depressed where it makes a tactile and audible click. The resistance of that click also makes it pretty easy to avoid accidentally pressing it in too far. A number of games make use of this (Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes being the first that pops to mind). In this way they kinda, sorta almost have four shoulder buttons.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[MMaestro]

Five, if you count the Z-button.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Ark42]

Lots of games use analog on the shoulder buttons, such as Mario Sunshine and Luigi's Mansion, to control how hard/far you shoot water or vacuum up ghosts.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[glassjaw rocks]

I would just like to say that the controller I felt fit the best was the Dreamcast controller. Hands down.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Anonymous Coward]

The analog shoulder buttons are absolutely brilliant in F-Zero GX. They're the strafe^H^H^H^H drift left/right buttons, and give you precise control of exactly how fast you drift. This is absolutely essential if you want to even think about making any of the harder turns, wonderfully tight, and very intuitive. And when you're making 90+ degree turns at oh, say, 2000 km/h, you'd better damn well have a good handle of the controls! ;D

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Anonymous Coward]

The best way to see that the GC's controllers are utterly, fully analog is to:

1. Pop in Smash Brothers Melee.

2. Pick a character that's not Yoshi.

3. Proceed to hold down either shoulder button however lightly, or hard, you wish. The shield-bubble beautifully and smoothly scales in size relative to the exact amount of pressure you are putting on it.

It's necessary and used constantly in the game itself, too. Big shields allow you to block attacks better, and smaller ones allow you to shield-grab. You often need to smoothly scale the size of your shield depending on the needs of the moment. It's an implementation that feels so natural you hardly notice it until someone points it out.

Nintendo is great at innovation; you have to give them that.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[tepples]

the ability to press down on the analog sticks (which almost no game uses because you can't hold them down while pushing at full force)

At least they're easy to learn in games such as Katamari Damacy, where pressing L3+R3 makes your ball do an instant 180.

Keeping the D-pad as a primary means of control was a mistake from the get-go

Have you tried playing games such as Tetris or most of the Game Boy Player library with a thumbstick?

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[kisrael]

Actually the thumbpad on the GC congtroller is a bit tough to use...I think it's exactly the same size as the GBA SP's, but because of the way you're holding the controller, it's tough to use. It always takes me and my friends a bit to get into Puzzle Collection games like Dr. Mario and Panel de Pon...

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised you can still type with your thumb torn to shreds like that.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlike the Dual Shock, the GC controller doesn't feel like I'm holding a grapefruit.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you read? He said it's the Dual Shock with a bunch of buttons switched around. That makes it basically similar.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Zardus]

I love Nintendo and am a huge Nintendo fanboy. I agree that Nintendo is pretty much singlehandedly responsible for a huge portion of our gaming experience today. The only current-gen console I have is the Gamecube and the only next-gen console I'll have will be the Revolution.

So, I love Nintendo, but statements like yours are kinda disappointing. I mean sure, the Wavebird (a controller that I love) was the first reliable wireless controller, but it didn't actually come up with something new. I mean, you could also say that the Wavebird was the first first-party wireless controller (was it?), or that XBox 360 controller was the first white, wireless controller (disclaimer: I haven't seen one). I'm of the opinion that Nintendo didn't really come up with anything new controller-wise for the Gamecube (at least not until the bongo drums came out). Lots of people bought the N64 for the analog stick and Z trigger and the like. I doubt lots of people bought the gamecube cause the Wavebird was wireless.

Let me take that back, actually. The GBA hookups were brilliant (if not a bit greedy, money-wise). Pacman VS is one of the funnest games I have played with a group of friends. Heck, my dad likes the game and he's never played a computer game (not even Pacman) in his life. It still impressed him. Granted, the Dreamcast had its VMUs, so even this accomplishment can be argued against as an original innovation, but I never saw the VMU as a viable gaming extention. It had an extremely low-resolution screen and I've mostly seen it used for splash-screens before games. Of course, it had the advantage of not replacing the controller (like the GBA hookup does) but extending it.

So, if we're gonna argue that Nintendo is innovative, controller-wise, in this generation, we should at least point to the GBA or the bongo drums or microphone, not at the fact that the Wavebird is more reliable than Mad-Catz wireless offerings were (I mean come on, anything Mad-Catz lasts almost no time at all. That's not a new development).

As an unrelated sidenote, I do have Mad-Catz to thank for having something like 10 spare GC controllers. My brother and I used mostly third-party N64 controllers (cause they were more comfortable), and their failure rate (analog sticks falling off, buttons getting stuck, etc) got it into the heads of all our friends that every time a birthday comes around or something, they should get us new controllers. So now everytime someone brings over a GC to play Mario Kart DD networked and forgets their controllers, its not a disaster by any means.

Re:GameCube controller == Dual Shock

[Manchot]

Well, the Wavebird uses fundamentally different technology compared with previous offerings. Older ones used infrared light to transmit data, which meant that the controllers had to (more or less) be aimed in the direction of the console. The Wavebird used radio frequencies, which is why it was so much better. Granted, Nintendo didn't invent the idea of a wireless controller, but they did make the first usable one. (By the same token, you might say that they didn't innovate when they made the N64's analog stick, because joysticks had been made before.)

Sigh

[etherealmuse]

They didnt produce a less graphically powered console because they couldnt compete with the 360, the did it on purpose. Real gamers know that better graphics dont equate to better games, but I'm fine with this all, I like indie music and indie movies. Now I get to like indie games and I can have scorn for the britney spears of the gaming world. Halo 3.

Re:Sigh

[dracocat]

Real gamers know that better graphics dont equate to better games.

Yes, but you have to admit there is something about a game where when you entranced by the soundtrack and awed by the graphics, when you forget real life for a moment, and believe for a time that you are the character on the screen that just sends chills down your back and keeps you coming back hungry for more.

I like RPGs so I'll speak about them... Sure good gameplay is important and without it you have nothing.. but add a system that takes away even the need for imagination and you have something there. Some will say that this heresy, after all isn't D&D perhaps the penultimate RPG ever made and it requires the most work and imagination by those playing it?

To this I say, sure the book is always better than the movie, gameplay is always better than graphics, etc.. But sometimes, just sitting back and being thrust into a game where become completely immersed with almost no effort at all is complete bliss.

I'll let someone else pay for the gameplay.. Give me better graphics, better sound, and bigger t.v.'s with higher defination!!!

Was three exclamation points too many just then?

before bashing the controller...

[Anonymous Coward]

just look at the hands on response, http://forums.nintendo.com/nintendo/board/message? board.id=revolution&message.id=889594

Re:before bashing the controller...

[nowhere.elysium]

That's not a hands-on response, that's a friggin' dissertation!

Re:before bashing the controller...

[Suddenly_Dead]

Hehe. That, and it looks a bit admittedly biased:

This topic is meant to show you that the Revolution controller will be comfortable, innovative, exciting, and work flawlessly.

Yes, horsepower...

[zegebbers]

but how many libraries of congress can it store on a football field?

Re:Yes, horsepower...

[Zardus]

but how many libraries of congress can it store on a football field?

Purple.

Ergonomics?

[adolfojp]

With traditional controllers players can rest their hands on the table, their laps, their stomachs, lying down with their hands on the floor or above their heads. I cannot imagine having to hold my hands in the air in front of me for more than 10 minutes with the new device. Then again, perhaps I am just lazy.

Re:Ergonomics?

[bubulubugoth]

Sure? I never rest my hands when Im playing...

Most of the time, I have "full body" movements, as my arms reac at the movement I want to do as I push the buttons...

I WANT a Nintendo revolution for the controll...

I want a jedi game for the revolution :)

Re:Ergonomics?

[Elfich47]

People using the system described as (paraphrasing here): sitting down in your couch/comfy chair and resting your elbows on your knees with your hands in front of you. From there you control the game. So you are sitting in a comfy seat in a comfy position to play your game.

Re:Ergonomics?

[akhomerun]

imaging sitting on a chair, holding a remote and resting it on the armrest. same with revolution controller.

you don't need to flail your arms around.

Burning question:

[thatguywhoiam]

How many GigaFuns does it do?

I am of course referring to the completely objective discreet units of fun, per billion.

I know a guy who was roommates with one of the head girlfriends of the 2nd assistant director of ALL OF NINTENDO and they said its a lot. Like, at least ... 9Gf. And it is scientifically proven that the original Xbox only rated a 2.3 Gf (and only with Halo), so this is, like, way better.

Plus, the console itself sort of reminds me of those power crystals that Superman used to control his arctic fortress of solitude, and that's about all the reason I really need to buy one. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself.

Re:Burning question:

[SetupWeasel]

I hear the Xbox 360 can do 70 kerspillion mega-mariachis per mexidecimal.

Re:Burning question:

[Guppy06]

"one of the head girlfriends"

Does that mean she was among the chief girlfriends, or... nevermind.

Re:Burning question:

[poot_rootbeer]

I heard it can fun at one million funs per megafun.

SRAM!

[DigitlDud]

The 1T-SRAM makes it all worth it, even if there's only 24 megs.

Re:SRAM!

[DigitlDud]

Err, make that 88 megs!

Re:SRAM!

[Slashcrap]

Err, make that 88 megs!

You do realise that 88MB of SRAM would require at least half a billion transistors don't you?

Of course you don't. So there's probably not much point bringing up the ludicrous amount of power required by 88MB of 1T SRAM either.

Re:SRAM!

[Anonymous Coward]

From wikipedia's page on 1T-SRAM:

1T-SRAM is a trademarked term owned by MoSys for the 1T DRAM technology which they developed. In development since the early 1990s, the goal of the product was to combine the speed of SRAM with the capacity and price of DRAM. The new 1T-SRAM has very low power consumption, has the speed and functionality of SRAM, and allows for the density of DRAM. 1T-SRAM is currently being marketed as IP for SOC developers.

So it's not actually SRAM, but it's still pretty neat.

Re:SRAM!

[default luser]

"1T" SRAM is DRAM with an SRAM front-end cache (thus, the "1T" name...DRAM requires one transistor per cell). Normal SRAM is "6T," which indicates it requires 6 transistors per cell.

So long as the front-end cache is large enough, the latency is close to that of a real SRAM cache. The benefit is "1T" SRAM uses a lot less die real-estate, and a lot less power.

Out of order

[tepples]

the 360 and PS3's processors need to be passed data sequentially, and because of that it makes it much harder to avoid bottlenecks and lag in code

Out of order execution helps primarily when running code that has been optimized for a different microarchitecture, such as single-pipe i486 code or UV-pipe Pentium 1 code on a 411-pipe Pentium II/III/M, or i486 through i686 code on a Pentium 4, or Pentium code on an Athlon. It's important on a PC because of the incremental improvements and multiple hardware manufacturers, and end users expect to see improved performance on the same proprietary binaries even through a completely different microarchitecture. Video game consoles, on the other hand, will have the same microarchitecture throughout a generation, and fine-tuned compilers can produce highly specialized code, especially near the end of the generation.

In addition, the nature of multicore processing is that if a thread running on one core gets stalled, another core will get more bandwidth on the external bus.

Re:Out of order

[ggareau]

Right, but wouldn't you run into portability issues with this in multiplatform games anyway?

I realize that the multi-core system is in place partially to compensate for this issue, but either way, it's not as though you're getting 3 processors 3 times as "powerful" as the Rev processor out of this. Sure, overall, it may be up to twice as "powerful," but I doubt it'll be more than that.

Re:Out of order

[tepples]

Right, but wouldn't you run into portability issues with this in multiplatform games anyway?

That's an input device issue (airmouse vs. gamepad), not an architecture issue. C, C++, and other compiled languages paper over any microarchitecture differences.

Re:Out of order

[be-fan]

You're wrong. Out of order execution helps when you have memory and cache latencies. Basically, on any modern processor, where it takes multiple cycles to access even the L1 data cache.

Re:Out of order

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but the compiler can pipeline small latencies, and not even OOO helps much for covering
memory latencies. Multithreading works well for this, and is only going to become more widely
implemented.

OOO can help when there are multiple levels of cache (eg. a compiler may only pipeline and
loop unroll enough to cover L1 miss latency, but not L2). But you still expect L1 to service
a large proportion of misses, especially in highly tuned code specifically written with that
size of L1 in mind.

OOO can help to get memory level parallelism, that is, to get multiple concurrent memory
accesses happening at the same time. However, there is nothing to prevent an in-order arch
doing hardware and software prefetching, speculative loads (in a sense, it already does
that simply with pipelining and branch prediction), and out of order stores.

As single threaded CPU performance can no longer rely on cramming on more (essentially) free
high power transistors and proportional clockspeed increases from process shrinks (we've hit
the heat/power wall, and wire delay is becoming a large factor in modern process tech), it
will be interesting to see which of either OOO or in-order processing wins out as the most
efficient / fastest.

Re:Out of order

[IamTheRealMike]

Right, it's not as simple as the OP makes out.

I've also come across statistics which indicate that under load testing the XBOX 360 chips seem to run at about half the speed their clock rate would indicate on real world branch-heavy game code, because they lack OOO execution. Sure, maybe in theory the compiler can remove the need for this, but that approach worked real well for the Itanium didn't it ...

Re:Out of order

[Anonymous Coward]

Software pipelining, various loop transformations, and prefetching ameliorate performance in the face of latencies in the memory hierarchy. This is much more important for high-performance because of the limited information available for optimization in the reordering hardware. In such a scenario it improves latency tolerance.

Re:Out of order

[Michael Hunt]

The Itanic sank for many and varied reasons, most of which had nothing to do with the front-end of the CPU being replaced by a smart compiler. These days, the latest revision of Itanic are actually quite fast, usable CPUs, although nobody is buying them.

  - The initial revision (Merced) was missing hardware support for several important features of the IA64 ISA which had to be trapped and emulated by the supervisor. This was corrected in Itanium2 (McKinley and onwards), but not before Merced got a reputation for being slow and awful.
  - Code for VLIW chips pretty much requires a recompile if you add execution units (I believe that Itanic supports nop-padding of bundles in hardware, but this is dumb). This is a far greater issue than needing a 'good compiler' to get decent speed out of VLIW chips.
  - The P4 was initially seen as a stopgap measure between Katmai/Tulatin hitting a clock-speed wall and Itanium becoming mainstream. This didn't happen due to a combination of factors (Sledgehammer and Itanium's awful handling of ia32 code spring to mind.) Instead of working on making Itanic competitive with Hammer, Intel decided to enter a clockrate pissing contest with AMD and eventually lost, forcing intel to get a bunch of Israelis to revisit Tulatin.
  - Nobody other than HP was actively trying to SELL Itanic boxes for the first half of its life. HP had bet the Unix farm on Itanic (and had committed to phasing out HPPA), but nobody was really interested for the reasons noted above.

As a result of these points (and others, i'm sure), IA64 became a historical footnote, rather than the replacement for IA32 and HPPA which Intel and HP had envisaged. The compiler technology was there (icc will write blindingly fast IA64 assembly, and I believe that even GCC does a reasonable job on it these days), but a combination of other technical factors and abysmal marketing pretty much doomed it from the get go.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[assassinator42]

Ah, but Nintendo is missing out on Burnout 3+, which is about as fun as Mario Kart.

lack of imagination

[Bein]

All the nay-sayers have a serious lack of imagination as to what the revolution controller is capable of. Imagine a sonic-like game where you are controlling the speed of your character by the angle you tilt the controller, as he cascades over hills and obstacles and through turns (--also, tony hawk/snowboarding games). Imagine a soul calibur game which is fully 3d, you control the direction of your attack by "whips" of the axis of the controller, and moves derive from complex curvilinear shapes, but are intutively similar to the motions performed on screen. Imagine any flight simulator/racing/dogfight/war game, all you do is point the direction you want to go. Imagine madden but you pump fake with a whip of the hand, and throw the same way but holding a button. Not to mention whatever Nintendo has in store for mario and such (the revo controller was designed for a new mario concept originally...) So many more things are possible with this controller than were before. (oh yea, of course, FPS's)

Re:lack of imagination

[Deliveranc3]

I was sooo enthusiastic about the revolution you wouldn't believe it until I learned a few key facts.

1. For the wireless to work it needs to have a stand set up in front of your TV (Yuck!). You'll note this stand isn't shown in any press pictures because it's so ugly, and who wants a tiny little sexy console with a huge frikkin antenna (or powerBrick).

Second the size of the antenna itself implies that the two points need to be very seperate to acheive what limited precision the machine does get, however I would be very reasured if the unit itself had the two transmitter/receivers because if you don't need say 2 ft of physical space you can keep your precision WAY higher.

I love my DS and I thought it would be what the Revolution is supposed to be, well designed, easy, fun, moddable, not too powerful but with added perks (no 2 minute load times ala PSP) and the stylus control is GREAT.

I'm concerned Revolution won't be a step beyond duckhunt but in some ways a step back.

It's a sad possibility but one you'll consider too when you see that antena.

Re:lack of imagination

[wmacgyver]

That's all fine and good. The issue is cross platform games. I don't have faith that say someone like EA will do a good job, or even attempt to support that controller in any meaningful way. So the risk is, you may end up have a sitution where all the first party games are well done and uses the controller very well. But most 3rd party cross platform games will play like crap. I suppose you can say "well, that's fine, I only play first party games anyway." But that's not so fine for 3rd party support.

Re:lack of imagination

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy crap, you're right! Nintendo spent all this time designing this work of art and completely forgot about the stand! Get Iwata on the phone, post-haste!

Seriously, is there something you know that we don't? Fact is, Nintendo is being secretive as usual about all this stuff. The only reports about the sensor are from developer kits, which are far from the final product. Do you really believe that Nintendo would go through all the effort to make such a sexy little console, and then completely screw up on this?

Concerning the accuracy, there were hands-on reports from a while back that confirmed that the Revolution's sensor system is indeed up to par. Don't believe everything you read, nice troll, etc.

Re:lack of imagination

[weicco]

Imagine a sonic-like game where you are controlling the speed of your character by the angle you tilt the controller, as he cascades over hills and obstacles and through turns

So its impossible to operate this controller when you are drunk? Then its no-buy for me :)

Re:lack of imagination

[Zigg]

Precisely right.

Many of the dev kits also are literally modified GameCubes with gigantic hardware protrusions off the top. Grandparent: should we also assume that this whole sleek box thing is a myth, and Revolution hardware is going to be packed into double-height GameCube that doesn't even take discs?

Re:lack of imagination

[Short Circuit]

>All the nay-sayers have a serious lack of imagination as to what the revolution controller is capable of. Imagine...

Telling them what to imagine won't help...

Re:lack of imagination

[elrous0]

Imagine a controller that doesn't work as advertised. Imagine lag. Imagine the console regularly losing controller orientation. Imagine Nintendo finally abandoning it for a conventional gamepad.

-Eric

Re:lack of imagination

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever since playing internet quake1 religiously I've scoffed at FPS console games. How can you play an FPS without a mouse? The same thing goes for RTS games like Warcraft. Nintendo's new controller finally brings consoles up to speed. Analog isn't enough -- it allows the user to carry out an action at variable intensity within a fixed range. A mouse, and now Nintendo's new controller, allow the user to carry out an action at variable intesity with no boundaries. Also, consider using an analog stick in a racing game. To turn slightly you just nudge the analog stick, right? But the car continues to turn while the analog stick travels back to its resting position, forcing the user to compensate. This annoyance doesn't exist with a mouse; it stops when it stops.

Nintendo shows us once again that all the money in the world can't overpower ingenuity.

Re:lack of imagination

[nuzak]

Imagine not being able to hold the controller at an angle that's comfortable for you.

Re:lack of imagination

[mtdenial]

I'm personally looking forward to what could be done with Mario Party games. As soon as I read about the controller, I envisioned 4 player mini-games where your position in the room relative to other players can give you bonuses or some other nonsense. That could be seriously entertaining.

Re:lack of imagination

[SamSim]

Ever seen someone unaccustomed to videogames playing a platform game, and when they want the character to jump, they wave the controller in an arc? That will actually work now. I believe this is the entirety of Nintendo's reasoning.

Re:lack of imagination

[Deliveranc3]

Wikipedia... "a sensor placed near the television allows the computer to sense the controller's position in three-dimensional space."... I'm looking for an image of the sensor.

I think Nintendo is trying to cover this one up...

Re:lack of imagination

[Deliveranc3]

Behold the ugly baton!

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/694/694785p1.ht ml

http://media.revolution.ign.com/articles/694/69478 5/img_3445353.html

Re:lack of imagination

[Anonymous Coward]

There are some images (you can find some, that may just be mock-ups or from TGS last year on IGN's site).

Nintendo has stated that they haven't finalized the design of the sensor bar yet. Arstechnica has an article up about how it might control, which involves a combination of ultrasound for left/right position, and ultrasound/IR for forward/backward position. So nerfs to whomever (grandparent?) said that it'd be better to have sensors further apart for better precision, this would work fine.

Also, as long as there's a line of sight between the controller's DPD, and there's a quick calibration button (the home button, perhaps), then you can put the sensor wherever you want, and it'd still work fine. It doesn't HAVE to go directly above or below your TV, that's just the most natural place to put it.

Asking the wrong question

[YU Nicks NE Way]

Why would you care about hardware stats? Do they guarantee "better games"?

News, MS and Sony fanbois...the answer is "no". Better games come out of better design which are sensitive to the kinds of passtimes people want to pursue.

But, um, Nintendo fanbois? There's another side to that. Hardware horsepower makes it far easier to build games with a wider scope for play. Remember the Halo grenade hacks? Those were damned fun, and, from talking to the dev manager on the product, I can assure you that nobody expected them or planned for them. They made heavy use of the fact that there was physics in the game -- and that depended on the hardware horsepower of the XBox.

So game design isn't

Re:Asking the wrong question

[TrancePhreak]

Mortal Kombat: Shaolin Monks had another interesting CPU restriction pop up. It was designed to work on the PS2, and they used ragdoll for death/pop-up attacks. If you get more than 2 people in the air at a time, the game will slow to a crawl. Thus they made it nearly impossible. This is because the PS2 version of Havok could not handle more than 2 ragdoll simulations at a time. Pretty pathetic.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[be-fan]

There are lots of classes of games for which graphics are important. Take for example sports games which are very popular in the US. Graphics are critical for such games to reproduce the realism of a real sports event. Since the actual game rules are fixed by the sport, there isn't a whole lot of room to innovate in the gameplay department, so going in the realism direction is the best option.

Also consider the genre of first-person shooters (which are also popular in the US). Graphics are important not just for creating atmosphere, but HD graphics are going to be great for multiplayer maps (you can see farther with more detail). CPU power is going to be critical to feed the advanced physics and AI engines that modern games are sporting. Take a game like F.E.A.R, whose great animation, physics, and AI really add to the experience, and shoe-horn it into the revolution, and you lose a lot of the specialness of the game.

Or consider RPGs. Console RPGs depend on a great degree on the ability to tell a story. Good graphics and animation are critical in conveying the epic feel of an interactive story. I mean, what would LOTR be without the sweeping views of the New Zealand countryside, or the huge, detailed shots of giant armies?

It seems very clear to me that the Revolution is destined to be another Gamecube: basically, a console only good for playing Nintendo's first-party titles. Sure, most of those are very good games, but how much is really in that library for a sports, RPG, or FPS fanatic? Because between the tastes of Japan and the United States, these are the genres that are really important to gamers. Of course, you could argue that Nintendo is aiming at a completely different market with the Revolution (eg: "The Sims" market), which could very well be true, but in that case, Nintendo isn't really competing in the same sphere as Microsoft and Sony.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Belgand]

Sports games, admittedly (since I don't like sports to begin with) aren't really my area of expertise so I'm going to decline commenting on it. The other two, however, I tend to disagree with.

Shooters are often some of the most graphically intensive games for a number of reasons and I think you outlined them fairly well. On the other hand gameplay is still the most important part of a FPS. Doom 3 was fun and was lauded for it's excellent graphics, but at the same time the gameplay was heavily criticized for being repetitive, unoriginal, and uninteresting. Half-Life 2 was a lot of fun and had a great physics engine, but I think many gamers were underwhelmed by the game compared to the impact of the first game's combination of an excellent story, realistic AI, and yes, the immersive triggered events.

Likewise as important as graphics are often considered for FPSs the controls are equally critical. While nothing has really been shown yet I think that the Revolution probably is going to have the best control available. Perhaps even better (due to the immersion factor) than the PC's current reign for a keyboard and mouse.

With RPGs it's important to tell a story, but at the same time this doesn't mean that hardcore realistic graphics are necessary. Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door and both Mario and Luigi games were excellent because they told a compelling and interesting story and mated it to fun gameplay... not because they had hyper-realistic graphics. Even looking back most RPG fans tend to care more about older games with a really impressive story (Phantasy Star II, Final Fantasy II/III/VII, Ultima IV, Baldur's Gate, Fallout I & II) rather than a game that had the best graphics either at the time or when replayed years later. Yeah Oblivion loooks great (and I don't like to categorize it here entirely because I consider it a more or less ported PC game due to the lineage of the series... but that's not strictly relevant), but what draws gamers to the Elder Scroll series has always been the wide-open gameplay, not cutting edge graphics. Remembering back Daggerfall didn't have the best graphics at the time and it was pretty buggy even when patched, but it was a fantastic experience to play.

While the Gamecube hasn't had the best library of RPGs and FPSs it doesn't seem to be the fault of the system itself or it's graphics. The 'cube tends to look better than the PS2 most of the time, yet that's where the vast majority of RPGs and a great many shooters are released.

Personally I'll agree that these are both popular genres, but when it really comes down to it I tend to prefer playing both on the PC over a console. Yes there are the occasional console RPGs that are a lot of fun (Paper Mario is awesome and I proudly own Final Fantasy I-III, Secret of Mana... even Shadowrun for the SNES), but I think that the controls of the PC tend to be better for both as well as the ability to mod them. Something that you won't really see for any console titles. When it comes to graphics the PC also tends to do a much better job and always will end up winning out as the cylce of development naturally favors the PC's ability to be updated (though, of course, this cycle doe not favor your wallet).

When it comes down to it graphics are nice, but a better game will win out almost every time.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[lordpud]

>I mean, what would LOTR be without the sweeping views of the New Zealand countryside, or the huge, detailed shots of giant armies?
Umm... a really good book?

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Don_dumb]

Graphics are critical for such [sports] games to reproduce the realism of a real sports event

Really, so the graphically superior FIFA games are better games than than their rival Pro Evolution Soccer?

No, sports games just like any other are about game play as opposed to good graphics. EAsports seems to have fallen into the "realism is good graphics" trap a few years back and in many of its sports games (such as FIFA) it has been overtaken by games that are more fun to play.

The biggest issue with a sports game is making a satisfactory model of the game that can be played, mapping controls to actions in a sufficently intuitive manner is a major issue. Therefore the Revolution may or may not have an advantage with its new controller if it turns out that it is easier or more difficult to map such actions. This is particulary an issue for such sports as Rugby Union as there are different parts of the game happening at the same time, one control for running actions another for rucking/mauling, only one Jonah Lomu Rugby has been able to stop a rugby game becoming 'lotteries' or unwinnable with poorer teams. And 10 years down the line my friends still play this one, despite its poor graphics.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

a really bad book, you mean. boring book bogged down in minutae

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

There are lots of classes of games for which graphics are important. Take for example sports games which are very popular in the US. Graphics are critical for such games to reproduce the realism of a real sports event. Since the actual game rules are fixed by the sport, there isn't a whole lot of room to innovate in the gameplay department, so going in the realism direction is the best option.

This is a commonly held misconception. Perhaps for sports Sims this is true, but sports Arcade games...poll football (soccer) fans over 20 what their favourite football game is.
I suspect it will look something like:

• Sensible Soccer: 45%
• Fifa 9x: 35%
• Kick Off 2: 10%
• Other 80s/90s: 5%
• Modern Console games: 5%

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Slime-dogg]

I dunno. I'd still say that the best basketball game ever made is "Double Dribble," and "Tecmo Superbowl" takes the cake for football.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

There are lots of classes of games for which graphics are important. Take for example sports games which are very popular in the US. Graphics are critical for such games to reproduce the realism of a real sports event. Since the actual game rules are fixed by the sport, there isn't a whole lot of room to innovate in the gameplay department, so going in the realism direction is the best option.

Wrong!

Tecmo Super Bowl for the NES is still more fun.

Madden has been painfully boring for years.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[powerlord]

Yeah, I agree. Graphics make a game. Take a game with a great story but mediocre graphics like the original "Alone in the Dark" on the PC.

Okay, I don't completely agree.

Don't get me wrong. Graphics ARE important. I also believe that there is still room for improvement, but the important question is: do the 'current' level of graphics allow for a whole range games to be made, without bumping the graphic level much, by providing good gameplay, stories, and content?

Sony and MS both feel the need to hold out their clockspeeds and polygon counts and measure up.
Nintendo decided to give a pass.

From a technological point of view I think Sony and MS have the right idea. I plan on buying a PS3 at some point (especially since I hear a new Ratchet & Clank title is being developed for it), since I've been enjoying my PS2.

From a buisness perspective Nintendo's view has a lot of merit though. For starters they could very well be making money on the console itself (or at the very least loosing much less then Sony and MS). This means they need to sell fewer titles per console to be back in the black on a given units sale. Add to that the more mass market appeal of the games and the pricepoint, and they might have something. After reading the current bunch of articles I'm going to keep an eye on the Revolution as a possible second console for my wife, something I hadn't considered before, but one that makes sense as a price point.

If not everyone buys a PS3 or X-Box360, but a fair number of people who buy one or the other, also buy a Revolution as a second box, in addition to those who ONLY buy a Revolution, Nintendo it would seem, wins :)

Re:Asking the wrong question

[TD-2779]

but in that case, Nintendo isn't really competing in the same sphere as Microsoft and Sony.

That's exactly what they've been trying to tell people for YEARS!

It's funny that you mention A.I. too, becaust that's EXACTLY what developers are complaining about regarding the 360. They claim that these types of things are HARDER to do, all because the hardware is made to pump out polygons at high resolutions.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

I think all your assertions are correct, but I would analyze them differently.

FPS, RPG, Sports games are indeed very popular among gamers.

But "gamers" is still a relatively small market compared to say "movie viewers." And Nintendo is suggesting they aren't trying to be in this league, but rather focusing on tapping new markets.

Take a look at the incredibly profitable casual games market that is mostly a 40-year old woman crowd.

Take my 65 year old mother who still has to call me for reminders on using the "start" button in Windows...couldn't even begin to use a console controller...but literally spent hours playing touch screen games on my DS?

I own an XBox and a Gamecube, I'm not particularly aligned with any company but I do hate the PS2. So if i'm a fanboy i'm an anti-fanboy.

I'm 22, so I should be in that "hardcore gaming segment"- but my tastes don't align with most of that market. Yet there are lots of people in my demographic with tastes more like mine who will be buying revolution even though they don't like most popular games today. What's my incline? Here's a list of games, from most desirable to least desirable, in terms of how much I'd want to play them:

1.) Something fun and original, easy to learn but hard to master, that has style instead of the most realistic death animations ever.
2.) Certain FPS games. Oddworld Stranger is the only one I've bought and played start to finish in the past 4 years.
3.) Crotchwacker (For the unitiated, this is a game where you whack yourself in the crotch with a sledgehammer.)
4.) Final Fantasy, Warcraft, or any RPG game.
5.) NFL Madden Thursday December 9th. I think this is the latest one, but they release a new one every day. Either way, I hate sports games.

Flame away.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Soul-Burn666]

Graphics ARE important, but number crunching doesn't good graphics make!
I'd take stylish 90's graphics over plain 06's graphics.
Can you really say Super Metroid looks bad? Could you say the same about Chrono Trigger?
The graphics are well outdated but the games look good, at least in my eyes!
You could say that's because it's 2D. But even in early 3D, for example Zelda:Ocarina Of Time imho looks good, even with its very low specs.

Or even a much more extreme example, take a book. The "graphics" are simply text, yet inside your head grows a complex and beautiful scene.

Sure I won't mind better graphics in technical terms, but that won't necessarily make a better game (examples: Far Cry, Doom3).

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Ahnteis]

After playing Doom3, FEAR, Quake4, UT2k4, Far Cry, Serious Sam 2, etc etc etc -- guess which game I'm STILL spending most of my time on.

Natural Selection. A Halflife (1) mod. That's right--I'm spending most of my time on a 10 year old engine.

Yeah, I'd like a version with better graphics -- but right now, it's the most FUN and ENTERTAINING for me, so I continue to play it.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[grimJester]

They wrote a LOTR book?

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll never get modded up for that, but it's still nice to see. So many better books out there that will never have epic movies made for them :(

Re:Asking the wrong question

[be-fan]

Really, so the graphically superior FIFA games are better games than than their rival Pro Evolution Soccer?

The difference in graphical quality isn't very big in this particular case. However, with the Revolution, the graphics quality is going to be a generation apart. While you and your friends may play old, graphically inferior sports games, most people do not. I don't know a single person who still plays sports games for the N64, though I know lots of people who still play N64 platformers.

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

You are way off on RPGs requiring superHD graphics and animations to tell a deep and engaging story. Fallouts and Planescape Tormet did this all very well, and the latter had a crappy Infinity Engine which is as static as they come (next to what NWN used).

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Thewayistao]

I also have played Halflife2 mods, UT2k4, and alot more bleeding edge graphical games and enjoyed them for a few months. However I think that the depth of gameplay doesn't suit my needs.

Instead I play a quake3 mod (www.promode.org). It's less cutting edge, uglier, and yet much more entertaining due to the amount of control, and speed.

Viva revolution

Re:Asking the wrong question

[Don_dumb]

Sorry to confuse with reference to playing older sports games, but the point was to that even for sports games (where EA seems to think the only thing everyone wants is fully licensed teams, accurate facial simulations and slick presentation) the truth is that good gameplay is more important than good graphics.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[assassinator42]

They do milk Mario Party too much though. I am definentally hoping to see an online Mario Party on the Revolution though. Nintendo's multiplayer games are usually really fun. One thing I notice is less online cheating on Nintendo systems. At least, I haven't seen any. Whereas you look at Halo 2, cheaters abound. I'm not quite sure why that is, but I hope it continues with the Revolution. And I'm hoping they won't go all "kid-friendly" and remove voice chat or something.

Re:Game consoles aren't all about powerful hardwar

[DeadChobi]

I agree with you, and I'd further like to say that at some point all the graphics in the world dont improve gameplay. In fact, games I found fun 5 or 10 years ago that get revamped with "cutting-edge" 3d graphics are less fun to play. Fighting games and puzzle games are actually bogged down by graphics, as it's the intensity of the gameplay that really makes those games.

And for $200 or less, I'd definitely buy a Revolution. I've been waiting for a controller that doesnt rely on the 40 year old meme of arrow keys and buttons to control your avatar. That was acceptable back in the age of sprite-based games, where there was no way to convey a sense of depth. Revolution is an appropriate name for their new system because, with the advent of fast 3-dimensional rendering, it has become possible to completely immerse one in a game, simply by giving them the ability to act out what they want their avatar to act out. The Revolution controller seems to be a step in this direction.

If people dont think that the step is large enough, I'd like to point out that Rome wasnt built in a day.

In games like Armored Core, DOA2, and Soul Calibur 2, I get frustrated by my inability to make my avatar do what I want it to do. Maybe it's just me, but playing a game isn't about tapping a few keys and completing a pre-defined action anymore. I'm expecting something more intuitive from the Revolution. I'll wait and see, but for now they have me interested, and at a price point that I can accept.

And as for the article? There were about two sentences with any real information. The rest of it was drawing wild conclusions based on hardware specs. This wont be news until we see some gameplay. After all, that's what video games are about, right? Gameplay?

Re:Innovative?

[GuyWithAccount]

As Nintendo has already announced, there in fact will be a standard controller shell that the Revolution controller can slip into that turns it into something like one of the controllers you see for other consoles. This is for any games that would work better on a standard controller. However, since just about every game can be made more fun and/or easier to control with the new controller, I expect that this will mainly be used for ports between Xbox 360 and PS3. And most games will probably not have lots of flailing your arms around. For example, with a FPS, my guess is that you would just move your wrist to aim, so you would probably be able to play for quite a while without getting tired.

Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and switch

[tepples]

on a non-HDTV

Once countries switch off analog broadcast signals near the end of this decade, late adopters who want to watch NCAA Division 1 gridiron football playoffs will rush to chain stores to buy new equipment at the end of 2008. You can bet that Best Buy and Circuit City employees will use high-pressure sales tactics to upsell a new HDTV to people who are looking at ATSC tuner boxes. How many families will still use a non-HDTV as their primary TV by the Revolution's end of life?

I second this

[rsilvergun]

Rogue Squadron III is still the most amazing game I've ever seen in my life (graphically). I think programmers are going to start to hit their limits in a lot of areas, especially on standard res TVs. I wonder if Sony and MS count tvs like mine in the list of 'Hi-Def' tvs, I've got component ins but no 480i or progressive support...

I must not get it

[glumx]

How does Nintendo not having the fastest CPU influence who will purchase their product? I think it is far more important to have good titles that are FUN, than good frames per second. I just was playing a racing game on my friends brand new, very expsensive XBox360 and it looked really pretty. The game, however, was TERRIBLE. And I am thinking to myself, did he really just fork out over 600 dollars to play this trash for a game when I will be hopefully playing something awesome (like Super Smash Brothers) for around half the price? And the graphics will still be better than they were. GOOD GAMES == GOOD CONSOLE ONLY GOOD FPS == BAD CONSOLE

Similarities outweigh differences

[tepples]

Sounds pretty different to me.

Tell that to the judge in, say, Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music . Apples and oranges are both fruits. Likewise, the GameCube controller's similarities to the Dual Shock and Dreamcast controller outweigh the differences.

Re:Similarities outweigh differences

[Tanamo]

Of course the similarities outweigh the differences, they're all controllers for games consoles which you hold in your hands, almost all of which have had, and will have, buttons and d-pads/sticks on somewhere - it's like saying that the similarities between a mini and a ferrari outweigh the differences!

Within the realm of controllers, they're quite different.

Re:Similarities outweigh differences

[tepples]

Within the realm of controllers, [the PS2 and GameCube controllers are] quite different.

But not nearly as different as the original PS1 and N64 controllers were. Compared to the controllers of the NES (first D-pad), Super NES (first shoulder buttons), and N64 (first analog thumbstick), the GameCube controller was highly conservative.

Re:Similarities outweigh differences

[Decimal]

And, the PS2 controller is just a SNES controller, with two analog sticks, two-extra top buttons, and pressure sensitivity. Similarities outweighing the differences and all. :)

whatever

[SpaceballsTheUserNam]

I havent bought a game console since they stoped making dreamcasts and sold'em for 50 bucks, and that was only because it was only 50 bucks and the games were free. I have no interest in either the 360 or ps3, but i cant wait till the revolution comes out and will probably get a one right away. that thing looks sweet. (fun)

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Meagermanx]

Ot that stupid Gameboy. That black, yellow and green monstrosity of a brick will never beat the Gamegear. Mark my words.

That reminds me

[rsilvergun]

of one of the funniest things I've ever seen: Barbie Horse Adventures for the XBox, complete with the really hard edged, 'to-the-extreme' box styling that marks the packaging as an XBox title. Somehow I think the designers had Halo more in mind when the box trim was put together.

Nintendo's primary demographic is ....

[TheAxeMaster]

It seems to me that Nintendo is targeting anyone who isn't a "gamer." And by that, I mean people that don't care about graphics, don't care about shooting people, don't care about sports simulations or any other simulation, etc. These people are kids and adults alike. They're people that want to play games for the fun of it, games you can get in and out of, not games you can make a lifestyle from. They don't care if they're the best at Game X, they just like to play it. Its fun and its different. These games don't need to run at 1080p because it doesn't make a difference.
 
Do I think it will be the best selling console in the US? No. But when you can't buy a goddamn DS in japan except USED and for a higher price than retail, I'd say they're doing something right, at least where they are...

Re:Nintendo's primary demographic is ....

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always considered myself a hardcore gamer, just one of a different sort than the tits, explosions, and football gamer. I've played everything Sid Meiers has ever released, Zelda, Final Fantasy (up until 8... the series peaked at 6) and a lot of other great games, mostly what I consider the cream of the gaming crop. I like graphics. I have a nice pcie graphics card in my PC. If I do play a game where lots of things explode, and I like those once in a while, I want the explosions to look nice. But graphics haven't been a big deal since Mario 64, and I have to say I'm quite excited about what Nintendo is doing for these reasons:
1. I'm not going to lay down more than $200 dollars for a console. I have a family now, that likes to eat.
2. I believe that with the kind of power they are talking about here, they can make great looking, complex games.
3. It seems the Revolution is likely to attract indie developers. Indie developers have made some of the games I've enjoyed most lately ( shameless plug:www.taleworlds.com)
4. With a finer control system, perhaps some of the more complex, strategic games I love can finally hit the console market.

Jaguar: DO THE MA+H

[tepples]

The SNES had its unique "color math" capabilities and the famous Mode7 affine matrix transformation mode.

Didn't help team sports games, which relied on raw video memory bandwidth to upload sprite cels for 22 players into the GPU. Those tended to play more smoothly on Sega Genesis.

I believe the N64 let you re-write the microcode in the GPU for custom needs.

The Atari Jaguar had that first.

Re:Jaguar: DO THE MA+H

[DigitlDud]

Nah, SNES memory bandwidth was excellent. It had 8 DMA channels and could hit ~2.68 megs/sec (that's a lot for back then). If there were any issues with moving sprites compared to the Genesis it was likely a CPU-bound problem. Of course, if this was really hurting the game you could always get one of those external co-processors in the cartridge. =)

Re:Jaguar: DO THE MA+H

[tepples]

SNES memory bandwidth was excellent. It had 8 DMA channels and could hit ~2.68 megs/sec (that's a lot for back then).

In one continuous transfer, or in the 512 byte transfers typical of loading 32x32 pixel 4-bit sprite cels? How many transfers could the Sega Genesis squeeze into one vblank, given the true 16-bit data bus and all? Even if I was a bit off, there's still the issue that EA Sports titles animated more smoothly on a Genesis than on a Super NES.

Re:Jaguar: DO THE MA+H

[DigitlDud]

Well, you can transfer 1 byte over DMA at about the same speed as 1 CPU cycle. With some dirty math, there's about 6810 CPU cycles in a v-blank period so you can transfer about 6.65 KB in a vblank. Of course you're not going to be updating character data EVERY frame. And you don't necessarily need to update any character data at all unless you can't fit all of it in the 32 KB of video RAM. Switching a sprite's character data to point somewhere else in memory is just a 1 byte write.

Genesis specs I'm not too familar with, but I've written an SNES emulator.

If a game performs shitty on one system, poor coding could always be blamed especially if it's a port.

Spec Point... Re:Price Point

[eonlabs]

I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the specs given are still pretty much useless.
This isn't like the Intel/AMD argument, because each of the chipsets has a different ISA
It isn't necessarily true that every command executed in the 3.2GHz cores of an XBox 360 will
constitute one clock cycle. In fact, I'm sure that a method of achieving those awesome frequencies
is by removing as much functionality as possible from each command the 'core' of the CPU performs.

The ON-GPU memory is really significant. 3MBs of in chip memory is more valuable than 15MBs of off
chip memory. It immediatly means that the GPU is able to concurrently manipulate the 3MBs of memory
as close to 'free of charge' as possible.

Since it's a gaming machine and doesn't need an independant os for much more than thread management,
This also means that those 3MBs will probably be dedicated to what is currently on screen.

From a texture memory perspective, one texel (texture pixel) is 4 bytes, assuming 32 bit color with
no compression. This means theres room for a million pixels in that memory at one time, or just shy
of a 1024x1024 pic. That memory can be manipulated quickly too!

For clarification, that is a REALLY COOL THING!!! That is the amount of data that can be played
with for FREE internally.

I don't know about anyone else, but judging by the 'spec' comparisons in the past, Nintendo plays
their resources to the fullest, and compared to the price tags of the other machines, I'm still
thinking Nintendo's box is probably going to be pretty nuts.

On a side note, I'm still not sure I like the idea of the controller...
I'm a 'reality' gamer, so if my natural habit of diving around while playing is a bad thing to have
while using a SDoF controller, the system is going to really let me down...
We'll find out, this is up for grabs for me

Re:Spec Point... Re:Price Point

[somersault]

"On a side note, I'm still not sure I like the idea of the controller... I'm a 'reality' gamer, so if my natural habit of diving around while playing is a bad thing to have while using a SDoF controller, the system is going to really let me down... We'll find out, this is up for grabs for me"

dont you think that the controller sounds perfect for you then? It plays the way people naturally feel like playing - as if it's 'real'. All those people who trained themselves to live through their fingers (well like me f'rinstance =p) will find we have to learn to be natural again.. it wont be perfectly natural, but I think will be more accessable to those who have not used a controller before (and just with the ability to do really cool things for those that already are)

Re:Spec Point... Re:Price Point

[Wiz]

The ON-GPU memory is really significant. 3MBs of in chip memory is more valuable than 15MBs of off chip memory. It immediatly means that the GPU is able to concurrently manipulate the 3MBs of memory as close to 'free of charge' as possible.

Yup, on-chip memory is always good. It should be also considered that the XBox 360 has a 10MB eDRAM cache for it's GPU!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360#Graphics_pro cessing_unit

Whilst the XBox 360 does render at 720p (interally, it downscales to 480p if you aren't using HDTV), as opposed to 480p for the Revolution, I still believe the XBox 360 has "effectively" more on-chip GPU memory per pixel than the Revolution.

Re:Spec Point... Re:Price Point

[OoSync]

Since it's a gaming machine and doesn't need an independant os for much more than thread management,
This also means that those 3MBs will probably be dedicated to what is currently on screen.

From a texture memory perspective, one texel (texture pixel) is 4 bytes, assuming 32 bit color with
no compression. This means theres room for a million pixels in that memory at one time, or just shy
of a 1024x1024 pic. That memory can be manipulated quickly too!</I>

Umm, except you've got it a bit wrong. The GameCube's Flipper GPU uses 1MB for texture cache and 2MB for Frame buffer and z-buffer. Also, the frame buffer that is written to screen is actually in main memory and usually statically allocated to PAL TV sizes so that there are no performance differences between US/Janpan NTSC and European PAL systems.

Also, S3TC (S3 Texture Compression) is 6:1 in 24-bit color and Flipper can decompress the texture data directly out of the 1MB texture cache. You can also only fill the cache with the particular chunks of textures you need (I forget the exact details but the texture cache is split up into many addressable chunks).

The Z-buffer and indirect texture mapping hardware are responsible for so many of the real nifty Gamecube effects. That heat shimmering in _Wind Waker_ and _RE4_ is one example, as are the shadowing effects in RE4 that are also not present in the PS2 version.

Its all in the Nintendo Patents and its all pretty interesting stuff.

Also, the X360 has 10 MB eDRAM embedded in its GPU. My understanding is that this is the direct-to-screen frame buffer (I could be wrong), which is not what that 3MB of 1T-SRAM is used for in the Gamecube (and presumably Revolution). Again, the Gamecube has its to-screen frame buffer in main memory.

Before there was Enemy Territory, there was E.T.

[tepples]

I doubt more than 1% of the gaming world even knows what a flop is

E.T., and I'm not talking about Enemy Territory.

I sure don't.

Seriously, the "flops" in "megaflops" stands for floating-point operations per second.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[svip]

'WOW' factor is far from a direct factor of system power. For starters Nintendo (and they're far from alone in this) have proven in the past that it's very possible to produce a game (much more visually appealing than thought possible on the console (Ocarina of Time springs to mind), especially when you're producing directly for the console, and not working with some massive crossplatform framework (Hi XAN). Along the same lines it's easy to produce an underwhelming game on a powerhouse system. Even Oblivion, a game heralded for its visual beauty (among other things) often seems more like a demonstration of various technologies with no real overall scheme. (Don't get me started, I enjoy the game, I really do, but that makes it flaws so much more obvious).

And ignoring the visuals, though it really remains to be seen what Nintendo will pull out of their weird controller there is a potential for a much bigger WOW there than 'we have HDR lighting'.

Finally you ask what game producers will want to bring games to a 'weak' system. Realize that far from all game producers think graphics and hardware performance the most important factor. Making high-end games isn't just a matter of using big enough hardware, it also takes much more work than working on weaker hardware. I'm sure a lot of producers will see the value in wokring on a console where the graphical expectations/requirements aren't as high, allowing more work on the actual gameplay which is what offers the lasting experience, or lower production costs.

I'm not exactly a Nintendo fanboi, though I did own a N64 and the original GameBoy - but both as a gamer and as a developer I'm watching where the Revolution is going with great anticipation.

It's in the wrist, not the arm

[tepples]

I cannot imagine having to hold my hands in the air in front of me for more than 10 minutes with the new device.

So don't buy ParaPara Paradise. Many games will use only orientation, not position, and you'll be able to point the controller with your wrist while your hands are on your lap.

Revolution the most interesting development yet

[suv4x4]

First of all: those numbers of course don't make sense, what's next, comparing CPU weights and color?
Anyways.

Will Revolution be as powerful as XBOX360 and PS3, no, it can't handle highdef and this should tell a lot.

Thing is, once you remove high-def support, you suddenly have a lot horsepower left to render great imagery on a 480p / 480i device. So we can't say that Revolution games will look worse than XBOX360 games on an NTSC/PAL TV which most people have out there.

But scrap even that.

Do you think Nintendo accidentally missed the fact their console is slower? And what means this for a game anyway? Does it mean worse gameplay or experience? Nintendo apparently is confident in their vision, enough so not to get into the dick length comparison game Sony and Microsoft are doing with their machine specs.

I mean, they support NES/SNES/Genesis titles for Christ's sake, were those games crappy? They look GREAT on a TV screen, and some titles have gameplay unparalled in modern titles.

Also it has enough power and innovation for great new content, what could a gamer want? Value and entertainment or silly spec numbers?

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[Keeper]

Thing is, once you remove high-def support, you suddenly have a lot horsepower left to render great imagery on a 480p / 480i device.

Except they don't. It'd be one thing if they had hardware capable of rendering hi-def graphics but restricted it to sd resolutions. But they didn't -- their graphics hardware is scaled back proportionally.

I mean, they support NES/SNES/Genesis titles for Christ's sake, were those games crappy? They look GREAT on a TV screen, and some titles have gameplay unparalled in modern titles.

If the only thing worth playing are games I played 10 years ago, why would I want to pay for them all over again?

Nintendo apparently is confident in their vision, enough so not to get into the dick length comparison game Sony and Microsoft are doing with their machine specs.

Translation: Nintendo knows that their specs can't hold a candle to the competition, so they make a point not to talk about it.

I guarantee you if their box had a 6 core PPC in it running at 4ghz they'd be bragging about it all over the place.

Also it has enough power and innovation for great new content, what could a gamer want? Value and entertainment or silly spec numbers?

You assume that the two choices are mutually exclusive. They're not.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[suv4x4]

"Except they don't. It'd be one thing if they had hardware capable of rendering hi-def graphics but restricted it to sd resolutions. But they didn't -- their graphics hardware is scaled back proportionally."

The PS3 and XBOX360 titles always render in highdef, this means even when you output on a TV you render at highdef and then downscale.

To get the highdef output adequate, you need better textures and a lot more polygons so it looks adequate on a higher resolution.

Then it gets downsampled and a lot of that detail is mostly lost for a regular TV.

Nintendo wanted highdef at once point, but they want cheap console "for the rest of us" a lot more, so their games are DESIGNED to run 480p.

At 480p, I suspect Revolution will be a match for XBOX360 and PS3, for the plain reason XBOX360 and PS4 has to work a lot harder to get that 480p image compared to what the Revolution does.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[suv4x4]

"Translation: Nintendo knows that their specs can't hold a candle to the competition, so they make a point not to talk about it."

I'll let you know something you may not know. In every product category, there's always two top brands that fight about specs, speed and power. A third brand doesn't stand a chance to fight with those brands.

People buy stuff because it's the top brand, most ads, with most games, most popularity, most prestige.

Right now MS and SONY are on top of the consoles market. They are the big two brands. If Nintendo offered a product that is the same or even a bit better than what they offer, they still won't sell since they are brand three and seen as a lesser player by the consumers.

So let's see what the books say again... If you can't be brand one or two in product category X, differentiate, innovate and create a subcategory Y where you're brand number 1.

So, Nintendo doesn't compete with MS and SONY, they explore new technologies and markets and I try to be the top brand in their own niche. DS was an obvious step in that direction, and Revolution will be the culmination of that strategy.

You can nag about how stupid it is to support 10 year old games you may have, but many people don't have them, and certainly not on a single sweet console.

People who look for genuine entertainment don't look at specs, but value. "10 year old" is just a number, if the game is great, it doesn't matter how old it is.

One more point in case, by the way, have you noticed how ugly the graphics are in Katamary Damacy? I mean it looks like pre-PlayStation 1 right? But somehow this game is pretty popular.

SPECS DO NOT MATTER.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[masklinn]

Translation: Nintendo knows that their specs can't hold a candle to the competition, so they make a point not to talk about it.

Duh? they said from the beginning that their system was nowhere near the competition horsepower-wise, and that they didn't give a damn about it because they were set out to make a great system to run great games, not a poly-count wankfest.

Flash News: Nintendo has never, in it's whole history, every tried to release the top-performing console. I don't know for the NES, but the SNES was less powerful than the Genesis, the GameBoy was less powerful than the Lynx or the GameGear, the N64 was less powerful than the PlayStation or the Dreamcast, the GameCube was less powerful than the PS2 and the XBOX, the DS was and is less powerful than the PSP. Has that ever stopped every single console of Nintendo from having awesome games and actually turning up a profit for N (as opposed to the XBOX or the PS2, which both losses for their respective manufacturers recouped via license sales)?

Long story short, that hasn't. Nintendo doesn't go for sheer power, they know better than that, and this is why they're still here, making thrilling consoles and games and still creating new gameplays every time they release a game or a console.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[BenjyD]

the N64 was less powerful than the PlayStation or the Dreamcast, the GameCube was less powerful than the PS2 and the XBOX,

No, the N64 was similar in power to the PS1 (theoretically faster but harder to program for, I believe) and the GameCube is significantly more powerful than the PS2. They didn't hype it up quite as much as Sony did, but the GC is a very well-designed console. Just compare Resident Evil 4 GC and PS2 versions.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[Manmademan]

Flash News: Nintendo has never, in it's whole history, every tried to release the top-performing console. I don't know for the NES, but the SNES was less powerful than the Genesis, the GameBoy was less powerful than the Lynx or the GameGear, the N64 was less powerful than the PlayStation or the Dreamcast, the GameCube was less powerful than the PS2 and the XBOX, the DS was and is less powerful than the PSP. Has that ever stopped every single console of Nintendo from having awesome games and actually turning up a profit for N (as opposed to the XBOX or the PS2, which both losses for their respective manufacturers recouped via license sales)?

Time for a history lesson. At the Time, the NES was the most powerful system on the market. That's not saying much, since most consoles fell victim to the crash of '84. The SNES was DEFINITELY more powerful than the genesis- it handled more colors, fancy scaling effects like mode 7, and had a custom Sony sound chip that absolutely destroyed whatever the Genesis had in it. Certain games (like the EA sports titles) rendered sprites faster on the Genesis, but genesis graphics were always less detailed.

The Gamegear was released in the states 2 years AFTER the gameboy. The Lynx made it's debut in '89 (the same year as the gameboy) but would drain 6AA batteries in about 3 hours of gametime- The Gameboy lacked a color screen vs. the lynx but had the advantage of using LESS batteries for MORE gameplay. This was a VERY big deal back then.

The N64 was more powerful than the Ps1. It handled less raw polygons, but antialising and texturing were much much better, plus- no load times. The Dreamcast was released 3 Years AFTER the N64- of course it was more powerful.

The Gamecube is Far Stronger than the Ps2 is. The differences between it and the Xbox is negligible. The DS is less powerful than the PSP, but again was released 6 months to a year prior. (sorry, no exact dates here.)

The Revolution will mark the first time in the company's history (or any company's, really) that it will follow up a major competitor's console a YEAR later with a LESS powerful system.

At the system's debut it will probably look quite good, but a year or two down the line when Developers are really starting to get the hang of the 360's 3 3GZ double threaded CPU's, or the PS3's dual threaded 3ghz core and 7 SPE's...we'll start to see a serious performance gap.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[masklinn]

They weren't. They were all weaker specs side and had role-specific chips to handle nifty effects (Mode7 was handled by a specific chip for example, not by the SNES' raw calculation power).

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[cornface]

I'll let you know something you may not know. In every product category, there's always two top brands that fight about specs, speed and power. A third brand doesn't stand a chance to fight with those brands.

He probably didn't know it because you obviously just made it up.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[suv4x4]

"He probably didn't know it because you obviously just made it up."

No I didn't just made it up, this is from the basics theory you learn in the business of branding and marketing, it's actually pretty interesting, there are studies about product categorisation and how people perceive brands, and how many brands in a certain category they can tell from their memory on the spot (the number is 7) and differentiation and so on.

When you read that you'll see it makes a perfect sense, and what Nintendo does suddenly falls perfectly in place.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[DeanCubed]

No, you're confusing the SuperFX used in Star Fox with Mode 7 in general, which was handled by the SNES for launch games like Pilotwings and F-Zero. Believe me, and millions of other people who know what they're talking about. Nintendo did not release underpowered systems until the DS and Revolution. Most of the time they were definitely the most powerful, or close enough that it didn't matter (Cube does some things better than X-Box, X-box does other things better).

Oh, and by the way, the Dreamcast should be included as part of this gen and not the N64/PS1 gen. It really wasn't too long ago that SEGA went third-party. The Dreamcast is just as if not more powerful than the PS2, believe it or not, and came with online play, analog shoulder buttons, the works. They lost because of Sony's marketing department and the debt SEGA racked up trying to get Sega CD, Saturn, 32X, Game Gear etc. off the ground.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[masklinn]

The Dreamcast is just as if not more powerful than the PS2, believe it or not, and came with online play, analog shoulder buttons, the works. They lost because of Sony's marketing department and the debt SEGA racked up trying to get Sega CD, Saturn, 32X, Game Gear etc. off the ground.

I know all of this and still have a fond memory of my dreamcast.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[Keeper]

Duh? they said from the beginning that their system was nowhere near the competition horsepower-wise, and that they didn't give a damn about it because they were set out to make a great system to run great games, not a poly-count wankfest.

Listen to yourself for a second. You're basically saying that a faster system can't run games as well as a slower system, which is about the most rediculous thing I've ever heard.

Nintendo has never, in it's whole history, every tried to release the top-performing console. I don't know for the NES, but the SNES was less powerful than the Genesis, the GameBoy was less powerful than the Lynx or the GameGear, the N64 was less powerful than the PlayStation or the Dreamcast, the GameCube was less powerful than the PS2 and the XBOX, the DS was and is less powerful than the PSP.

I couldn't give a crap about handheld games; they're a different ball of wax than consoles. (among other things, battery life plays a large part in the appeal of various devices).

* The NES was the most powerful console of it's generation.
* The SNES was more poweful than the Gensis IMO. It could display more colors, had better sound, and had better graphics hardware.
* The N64 was a fuckup that most people would rather forget.
* The GameCube is more powerful than the PS2 and roughly on-par with the Xbox.

Has that ever stopped every single console of Nintendo from having awesome games and actually turning up a profit for N (as opposed to the XBOX or the PS2, which both losses for their respective manufacturers recouped via license sales)?

Did I ever say it didn't? Where did I fucking say that it was going to flop? Christ, put the fanboy blinders down and read what I actually write instead of what you think you heard.

Long story short, that hasn't. Nintendo doesn't go for sheer power, they know better than that, and this is why they're still here, making thrilling consoles and games and still creating new gameplays every time they release a game or a console.

That hasn't always been true, and you know it. Otherwise you wouldn't remember them advertising things like "mode 7 graphics". If they did have the most powerful console, they'd be advertising it. End of story. Marketing people don't ignore checkbox based comparisons when the thing they're advertising wins.

The fact that they didn't set out to have the most powerful console is a different story entirely. If it were, they'd still advertise it. Get over it.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[cornface]

Right. I guess you have another explanation for all of the markets that compete based on specs and power and have more than two top brands successfully competing in defiance of your inital blanket and unsupported assertation?

I'll post it again so you don't try to alter history.

I'll let you know something you may not know. In every product category, there's always two top brands that fight about specs, speed and power. A third brand doesn't stand a chance to fight with those brands.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[Keeper]

I agree with you and disagree with you at the same time.

I agree with you regarding the amount of work that the Revolution and the PS3/360 must do. I disagree that the hardware in the Revolution will generate a 480p image roughly on par with a 720p image scaled down to 480p.

To understand where I'm coming from, take a look at how various graphic cards at different clockspeeds scale between resolutions. Then take a look at the image quality between various generations of cards.

Re:Revolution the most interesting development yet

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a few:

Nintendo/Sega
Nintendo/Sony
PC/Apple (old, but it fits)
AMD/Intel
nVidia/3DFx
nVidia/ATi
Coke/Pepsi

Coke/Pepsi is a bit of a stretch, but it's interesting how Coke and Pepsi vie for the top 3 or so soft drink spots (I think it goes Coke, Pepsi, Diet Coke, but I could be wrong) while Cadbury has the next 4 or 5 to themselves (A&W, 7up, Sunkist, etc).

When you look at the GCN, it was trying to be a PS2 rival (like the N64 was a PSX rival), but Microsoft easily displaced them with it's better marketing, and larger budget. Microsoft took away a lot more marketshare from Nintendo then they did from Sony.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[svip]

But... but... no hookers? No violence? What's the point then?

Re:This will be Nintendo's last console

[L0k11]

nice troll :P

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Bega]

honestly, most Nintendo games are aimed at younger kids anyway (Mario Party, etc.)

While most of the games look nothing like the "mature" mainstream, they aren't solely targeted for kids, even though their playful graphics may let people believe. For instance; party games -- the best example of a working, social, "friends' get-together"-game for the evening. "Fun" is where these games have their emphasis, as where "thrill" or "adrenaline boost" is where your run-of-the-mill stereotypical mature games have theirs.

But yes, I agree with you, or at least hope that it will happen, that the parents will choose the affordable one for their kids. I believe that the mainstream gaming has gone a little bit to hell as of late (not going to start into a flame-war here now). It'll be interesting to see how the Rev will do, even though there will be lots of gaming zealots screaming bloody murder over the allegedly slow system specs.

Re:Nintendoh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Nintendo makes more in a year than all of Sony. Shouldn't be too surprising since Nintendo only takes in a profit, while Sony has alot of their money invested in things that are not necessarily making them money, yet. Also Nintendo usually takes a small hit for a short time on their electronics, whereas Sony has a history of selling cheaper than it costs to make or below the Marginal Cost, which is where Nintendo usually sells their consols at.

Re:Innovative?

[Elfich47]

Did you ever look at the original Xbox controller? Pain incarnate. That is all on that subject.

yahoo serious?

[eddeye]

As Lisa Simpson would say, I know what those words mean, but that headline makes no sense.

Good move nintendo.

[HaMMeReD3]

To all the fanboys and haters, regardless of what you think, this is a smart move in the part of nintendo. Sure, they may not be the fastest of the bunch, but regardless, it'll profit. And isnt that the reason any business is around, the good old step #4. It'll cost nothing for nintendo to produce, they'll make profit on the consoles, they'll make more profit off the emulation of all the systems they are gonna cover. This will milk the last 20 years of gaming for all that it's worth.

So kudo's nintendo, while microsoft and sony fight it out and lose money on every console they sell, you will stay in the game, and get an extra life to play the next round with.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone can afford or wants to spend multiple $1000s on a TV.

But the real question here is why don't they make small, cheap HDTVs? Why does everything have to be 40"+ plasma screen? Why can't they make 24" CRT HDTVs? Or do they make them and just not market them?

Re:Nintendoh!

[minorproblem]

Seeming they were the only company to not loose money on there consoles from the previous generation and sold very well in europe and japan, as well as owning a large proportion of the game sales rather than 3rd party vendors, i wouldn't be suprised if they made more money on the consoles than sony or ms.

Is there a mhz for "is it fun"?

[superultra]

The fact is that the people who really care about mhz and clock speed have either a) already bought an xbox360 and will not buy a Revolution, or, b) will buy all three consoles anyway. Talking about speed and graphic capabilities is useless. It all boils down to: is it fun?

From 1080i to 480i

[Cardcaddy]

I am used to and highly enjoy playing games in 720p/1080i on my Xbox 360. Its going to be quite a depressing change if I have to play the new Revolution in a 4:3 aspect ratio.

Re:From 1080i to 480i

[Anubis350]

Considering that I and my friends sit around and play the SNES on a 62inch screen TV, where the pixels become as big as my thumb and it's a helluva lot of fun, I'd say that fun>graphics resolution. If the revolution has lotsa fun games (as I'm sure it will), then who cares if it cant do 1080i... Most xbox660 games I've seen are pretty and stupid, I'll take fun with less graphics any day.

Re:From 1080i to 480i

[Anonymous Coward]

No idea where you pulled that one from?

The GameCube currently supports wide-screen 16:9 aspect on games. There is absolutely no reason for the Revolution to only support 4:3.

The 360's graphical prowess is also no indicator of its' ability to display content in a better format than the Revolution either. I was very disapointed to find Gauntlet on the 360 running with huge black borders around the display due to shoddy, half-hearted programming. Even my PS2 ran Gauntlet better than the 360 using your own criteria.

I'm enjoying my new 360 and its graphics, but anyone who has owned a Nintendo product like the GC will tell you that there is simply no other gaming company out there that can compete with Nintendo in the fun and polish stakes... Their games are just so much more accessible than anything MS or Sony could ever put out.

I'll get a Rev the day it comes out to compliment my 360. The 360 for the wow graphics and involved PC-style titles, and the Rev for being the pinnacle of arcade/console style gaming.

Re:From 1080i to 480i

[Anonymous Coward]

Most xbox660 games I've seen are pretty and stupid...

So what are you saying? 360 games are whores and Nintendo games are wives?

Re:From 1080i to 480i

[BenjyD]

Why does the resolution have any impact on the aspect ratio? There are plenty of Gamecube games that have a widescreen mode.

Re:From 1080i to 480i

[SenorCitizen]

I am used to and highly enjoy playing games in 720p/1080i on my Xbox 360. Its going to be quite a depressing change if I have to play the new Revolution in a 4:3 aspect ratio.

Why do you suppose that? NOBODY has said that the Revolution wouldn't support 16:9 modes, just that it won't use HD resolutions. It can and will use 16:9 modes, just like the GC, PS2 and Xbox do now. In the previous generation, only the Xbox had a non-volatile setting for aspect ratio that games would follow, on the PS2 and GC you had to set it per-game. I bet this nag will be fixed in the Revolution...

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Alot will, because it will only cost say $50 for a digitial receiver for your already working TV. ALot of people cannot afford to pay over a thousand dollars for a new television, they'd must rather spend it on others things.

Mod parent up

[teklob]

Nintendo has always been about innovation. I still play Mario 64, and it came out ten years ago. Why? Because it's a fun game. As for this article, it really doesn't say much.

If it's FUN...

[Anonymous Coward]

...who cares about the specs? Some of the best games are older games anyway. And some of the crappiest games run on the latest hardware. it's the GAMEPLAY that matters, not the hardware!

Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[Hellboy0101]

I was looking forward to the Revolution's controller to be able to play FPS games such as COD2 and the upcoming UT2007. Since MS is not allowing a keyboard and mouse (I don't know Sony's plans), I was hoping the Revolution's freestyle controller would be what I was looking for. But with lower end specs like this, I'm not so sure. Perhaps I will be upgrading my PC after all.

Re:Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[Twiceblessedman]

Two words: Metroid Prime.

Re:Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[akhomerun]

is that all FPS games are to you, shiny graphics?

the only reason FPS games are still around is because of the shiny graphics. there is NO innovation in the FPS genre, just shiny graphics.

Re:Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[Hellboy0101]

Yes, there is more to it than shiny graphics (look at the continued success of CS). However, UT2007 looks to be very promising, especially with the other games that will be powered by the Unreal 3 engine, and I do love the gameplay of COD2. HL2 is also top of my list, and yes I was looking forward to being able to play it in HD. However, I hate playing a FPS with a standard console controller. The Revolution's controller held out promise, but if the system is going to be hobbled by low(er) horsepower, I'll reconsider buying it for the games that CAN and DO provide innovative and fun game play mixed some nice eye candy that will look great in HD. I am looking forward to console gaming giving me the best of both worlds, and saving me money from having to upgrade my PC for games like Battlefield 2.

Re:Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[myz24]

Agreed! Metroid Prime is just incredible. Sometimes when I first fire up the game after playing something else or just not playing GC for a while I'm amazed at how smooth everything is in Metroid Prime.

I bought my entire setup, except one new controller, used for under $70. I found Metroid Prime for $6 at a used game store. The game alone has gotten me back into gaming and now I'm looking forward to the Revolution because of it's ability to play the older games.

Re:Possible dissapointment for FPS fans.

[akhomerun]

yeah, games like CS keep being successful because they were the innovative FPS games.

That's why people still play games like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark.

So are these bad games because they have N64/DX7 era graphics? Absolutely not.

Revolution will most likely look close to what the other next gen consoles do at 480p. Run an Xbox 360 at 480p and you'll probably see what I'm talking about (Although of course it may look even more terrible since Xbox 360 games are 720p native)

It's in my opinion that those graphics are perfectly enough, especially considering the lower price, smaller size, and quieter-ness

Re:Innovative?

[Bagels]

Decent wireless controllers, period, in fact; the WaveBird was among the first wireless controllers to work properly, since Nintendo ditched finicky IR-based wireless and went with a radio-based system.

Re:Innovative?

[ZackSchil]

Nintendo has invented, adapted, and popularized more game controller technologies than anyone else. You list should look lore like:
Control Pad: Nintendo. Shoulder Buttons: Nintendo. Self-centering thumbstick: Nintendo. Rumble feature: Nintendo. First wireless controller that didn't suck: Nintendo. Touch screen gaming: Nintendo.

Sure, most of these technologies had been around for long enough, but it has always been Nintendo and no one else who has taken them, made them fun, and changed console gaming forever. I think, if nothing else, that should make every person who bombs on the Rev controller stop and think for a second, and try not to pass final judgement until November when they can give the real deal a fair shot.

Re:Before there was Enemy Territory, there was E.T

[SetupWeasel]

This link is more fun.

Re:Innovative?

[PixelScuba]

All of those were invented and implemented before Nintendo implemented them in "latest Console"(tm). The Vextrex had an analogue Control Stick in 82, "rumble" was available in PC joysticks for years as Force Feedback, and wireless controllers were available for over a decade and not invented by Nintendo. Heck even the Nintendo had the Satellite back in the 80s.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Just get a good tuner card for your PC, and watch HDTV on the 1600x1200 computer screen. Beats the living SHIITE out of any $2,000-ish "HDTV-ready" crap they push on consumers out there! Plus record at will, whatever the hell you like, with shell scripting (e.g. from cron).

Re:Innovative?

[Twiceblessedman]

You apparently don't realize how successful the ds is and how much people are craving innovation at the moment.

Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Cadallin]

That's the difference! While the market has migrated away from real gamers, we're still here. That's what Nintendo is aiming squarely at this generation. Nintendo appeals to two groups: Family friendly (where the "kiddie" accusation comes from, but Mario Kart is still a blast, and so is Pikmin) and the real old school gamers who never left, i.e. the people who played Gradius, and Contra, and Castlevania on the original Nintendo.

Gaming has temporarily (yes, Temporarily!) gone mainstream, just as it did in the early 1980's. This too, shall pass, Sony and Microsoft will fall, but Nintendo will remain, cranking out profitable quarter after profitable quarter. The mainstream audience demands tits and ultraviolence, so that's what Sony and Microsoft deliver, but the mainstream is fickle, and doesn't really give a damn about any one type of entertainment fundamentally. This era is going to come crashing down just like the Atari 2600, and Nintendo will be there, AGAIN, to pick up the pieces and move on.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[IntergalacticWalrus]

I think I understand now why Nintendo called it Revolution. They have predicted a new videogame crash due next year, and then the Revolution will come and save it all! Those clever bastards!

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[QuantumLeaper]

You mean just like the NES did in '85 or so. It brought back a dead industry.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[MemoryDragon]

The industry was not dead, it just was declared dead by the press because the atari2600 went down under, in 85 home computers were thriving (most of them bought as gaming console which you could do more than gaming with) while the consoles were on a hiatus. Probably the biggest "console" in 85 was the C64 with, it never was considered to be a console, but face it it just had a keyboard and a disk drive, but 99% of the time was used for games only.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[IntergalacticWalrus]

Well done Captain Obvious!

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Cadallin]

It's naive to claim the video game industry wasn't dead because of the 8-bit personal computers like the Commodore 64. The C64 never had the market punch the 2600 had, and no actual software for the C64 had sales numbers like the 2600 games in during the '80-'83 period. The market positively wilted from million selling titles on the 2600, to companies being thankful for shipping 10,000 units on the C64 and Apple II. If you want to try and force it to be seen that way.

I think it is more accurate to describe the situation as the Video game market crashed so hard, the then miniscule, but still growing, Personal Computer market came to dominate for a short period of time. After all, the Personal Computer market goes back even further than the home PONG machines that predated the 2600.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[MemoryDragon]

The main problems home computers had, were that from day zero nobody bought the games, but copied them. So games like Impossible Mission from Epyx probably had a higher number of players than the average Atari 2600 title, but no one paid for that stuff except for a few thousand people.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Serapth]

Why is it that everyone seems to believe all things are cyclical in nature?

Because the game market crashed once doesnt mean its about to happen again. Actually the reality of todays market goes a long way towards preventing a crash. There are three different companies with three different products. That itself is a signifigant difference from the last "crash". Then, there was basically Atari... and... Atari. Yes, Coleco, Intellivision etc existed, but market share wise, it was all Atari. Plus quality controls werent in place... anybody could shovel any crap out for the Atari... and they did. Now ( no matter how hard it is to believe ), the big 3 actually stamp a game to assure a minimum level of quality. Especially in Sonys case, they do appear a bit lax ;) but shovel ware is definatly limited.

I also argue that there wasnt a crash. More accuratly, one company imploded, but frankly as a gamer then, the disruption was basically not even felt. 1983, the Atari corporation blows itself up through a series of retarded business moves. 1984, NES is released in North America. Gee... some crash. Not to mention the number of home gaming computer that were popular around this time. The Atari's and Commodores of the day.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[monkeywraith]

i have been a gamer all my life. i fondly remember spending hours playing boulder dash on my commodore ... still play when i run accross an online version. i have played numerous games on every console ever built. i admittedly keep the zsnes emulator on my computer, but i rarely use it. as the guy before you mentioned, video games are getting better. contra was awesome when it came out, but 2d sidescrollers are now the realm of online flash games. i enjoy the newest graphics and button filled controllers. some nastalgia is good, but it should not hinder the wonderful progress that the video game industry is making. with those specs i doubt i will purchase a revolution; i will, however, be purchasing a ps3.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Suddenly_Dead]

So how specifically is the bettering of video games hindered by the Revolution's specs? You sound like one of the people who prefer to watch their video games over playing them. That's hardly a definition of a gamer.

I doubt there is any type of gameplay the the Revolution will not be capable of but the PS3 will be (especially with the cookie-cutter state of games nowadays). Sure, it might not look as shiny, but that's it. It is nothing like comparing an Xbox to an Atari 2600, because it's quite clear there that you could have nothing like Halo on the 2600. The reverse will probably be true, since the Revolution's odd controller and access to classic games will give it more varied gameplay.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Cadallin]

Why is it that everyone seems to believe all things are cyclical in nature?

Maybe because they ARE? See the "business cycle," trends in fashion, popular music, etc.

The NES was not released in America in 1984, according to Wikipedia, it was released in Japan in 1983, and then in America in late 1985, with a European release in 1987. Deeper in the article it notes that the 1985 release wasn't even nationwide, that didn't occur until February of 1986.

I would argue that shovelware isn't limited at all on the Xbox or PS2. Nintendo does strict testing to prevent it, but not them. There's a LOT of crap on the PS1, PS2, and XBOX. The PS1 suceeded due to:

1. Final Fantasy VII

2. The fact that all the shovelware was "3-D!", and therefore the consumers bought it up like they did the crap for systems in the late 1970's and early 1980's.

Re:Nope, You ARE a Gamer!

[Wdomburg]

The C64 didn't have "market punch". The Atari 2600 had a higher peak but didn't sustain sales, whereas the C64 was pushing over two million units a year from 1983 to 1986. In total, they shipped 30 million of the buggers, which tops even the estimates of total unit sales for the 2600. Don't have figures on game sales, but I seriously doubt popular titles were struggling to hit 10,000 units.

To say that the emerging microcomputer market didn't have an impact on the video game industry is a bit naive, considering the firms own market research from the time confirmed the success of advertising campaigns aimed at convincing parents that general purpose computers were a better investment.

Re:Must be a mistake...

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like none of the mods have a sense of humor... or recognizes an obscure reference to the Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy concerning mice. What a shame.

Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[earthbound kid]

Nintendo has repeatedly said that they weren't going to release the specs to their next console, because it's irrelevant and misleading. IGN just proved their point. Everyone who knows anything about CPUs knows that PPC chips perform better on a per-megahertz basis than x86 chips, yet IGN acts like Xbox's higher clockrate means it was necessarily better than the Gamecube. (Maybe, maybe not, but the MHz tells you exactly nothing about the question.) Similarly, he's comparing the Xbox 360 to the Revolution without noting that they have completely different architectures. It's like saying, "this Japanese guy's phallus is 10cm and this American guy's is only 6", therefore, 10 being larger than 6, the Japanese are more fun in the sack for the ladies."

This article is completely misleading, and further illustrates why Nintendo didn't care to publish their specs. None of these specs have anything to do with whether the Revolution is fun or looks good. For that, we have to wait until E3 when Nintendo shows off the console to the public. Until then, it's all just meaningless dick measuring.

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Superfarstucker]

I believe the xbox and the ps3 both use PPC instructions...

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Superfarstucker]

I understand what you were saying now, misread the post.

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Anonymous Coward]

7 and 3/8" here. u?

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Vo0k]

2.5"
In the laptop.
Oh, you didn't mean DISK?

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[indil]

...yet IGN acts like Xbox's higher clockrate means it was necessarily better than the Gamecube.

Actually, it's commonly acknowledged that Xbox is more powerful than GameCube, and GameCube is more powerful than PlayStation 2. At least on IGN. Read head-to-head reviews if you don't believe it. Xbox does have a faster processor -- actually it seems to have faster everything -- so its processor certainly contributes to its overall performance gain over GameCube. In this case, history has born out Cassamassina's statement to be true. In general, however, you are right that it's not a fair comparison.

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[earthbound kid]

Of course, you're right. That's why I put the disclaimer "maybe, maybe not" in parentheses. :-D The 'Cube was much closer to the Xbox than one would expect from the numbers, however.

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[masklinn]

And you are perfectly right.

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Anonymous Coward]

Xbox has a HD, bigger disks, and online capabilities that are worth a damn (i.e it's more powerful), but the graphics don't seem any better. In fact Rogue Squadron 3, RE 4 and Metroid Prime 2 look a lot better than Halo 2 (those hilarious glitches in the cutscenes particularly :). I haven't played as much Xbox as Cube though so maybe I've never played the prettier Xbox games.

(don't own either - buying consoles is for suckers without friends to mooch off :)

Re:Illustrates Nintendo's point.

[Grey Ninja]

GameCube has better memory latency. GameCube *might* have a faster CPU. GameCube has more memory bandwidth. GameCube does not have unified memory. Xbox is layed out a lot like a laptop, and I think that's where it ultimately got toasted by the GameCube. After all, why is there nothing on Xbox that runs better than Rogue Squadron III?

Re:Nintendoh!

[c_forq]

Ummm.... you know Nintendo has continuously had greater profits then all other companies in the console and portable gaming markets... right? They have been able to make money just fine in Japan, and have always managed to make money on system sales AND games. Plus theirs that whole Pokemon thing that was spun off into anything kids would bug their parents to buy for them, the returns on that one was practically like winning the lottery.

I like the GameCube design

[shadow0_0]

I have all 3 of the current generation (or is it last?) of consoles. The GameCube is definitely most fun to play with friends. Mario Kart, Mario Party and Smahs Bros. Hours of fun and anyone can join in because the games are easy to learn for non-gamers. I cannot see how improving the graphics in Mario Kart is going to increase the fun.

The other thing is I really like the design of the GameCube itself - the distinctive purple colour and the multi-color controllers. And the handle for you to lug it around is a stroke of genius :)

Re:I like the GameCube design

[kisrael]

Agreed on all counts..I own all 3 as well and have about the same sentiment. The GC is the system that travels, both for the quality and quantity of its multiplayer games, and for its lovely compact design. Only the MacMini out shines it in the "things I wish I could use as a PC case" department. Sony has nice compact remakes (psone and pstwo) but Nitendo got it so right from the get go...

Re:I like the GameCube design

[mink]

We (my wife and I) went with the black one so it would be perfect.

Wheres the software?

[MMaestro]

Hardware horsepower makes it far easier to build games with a wider scope for play.

Thats true, but then wheres the software to take advantage of all this new hardware? There are 3+ GHz processors out on the market for less than $200, yet the most hardware intensive things available are computer graphics, which have unrealisticly high levels for casual use/creation besides video games. Physics usage is new only because of prior software immaturity (UT2k3 had ragdoll physics but you didn't see much showcasing of it especially since most gamers ignored it at the first week) and because most developers really couldn't find a way to implement it into games without it being nothing more than a gimmick. (Which is where a lot of anti-HL2 protesters get their claims about the game being nothing more than a showcase for the game engine.)

They made heavy use of the fact that there was physics in the game -- and that depended on the hardware horsepower of the XBox.

No offense, but have you even played Halo 1 or 2? Physics is that game is really nothing more than eye candy 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time where physics in the game really matters is when you take the time to VERY slowly (the 4 grenades of each limit really bogs things down) move things around the environment to your advantage. (On levels where there were those Covenant crates, it was possible to use them as a source of movable cover, assuming the enemies didn't rush you or have some serious firepower or the fact that you had to move them inches at a time.)

Re:Wheres the software?

[YU Nicks NE Way]

You're talking past me here. I agree that the physics was eye-candy. My point that is its existence allowed for a secondary set of experiences in the game that were fun, and which really demanded the CPU horsepower that the XBox had. The fun was there, and it required the XBox specs.

Re:Game consoles aren't all about powerful hardwar

[Anonymous Coward]

How much can you expect from a sub $1000 USD mass produced, proprietary (not necessarly a bad thing) box?

Gee, I don't know, but the PS1, PS2, XBOX, XBOX 360, NES, SNES, Sega MS, Sega Genesis, Sega Saturn, Dreamcast, NeoGeo, Atari 2600, Colecovision, and the Gamecube (to name a few) were all pretty amazing when they came out, and they were all sub $1000, mass produced (some more successfully than others) and proprietary.

As so many others have mentioned, it looks like the Revolution will target a different niche than the PS3 and 360, and it will likely sell well enough as long as it is substantially cheaper than the other two.

Why are you misquoting?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. The "performance" number he's quoting are complete crap.

"IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz."


Hmm your copy and paste seems to have malfunctioned:

"IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU, admittedly a different architecture altogether , was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz."

I wonder what you were thinking when you decided to omit that part? ;)

Re:Why are you misquoting?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder what you were thinking when you decided to omit that part? ;)

Perhaps a version of the article that did't have it?
(just a guess, like every good /.er I don't bother myself with actually researching anything)

Re:Why are you misquoting?

[davidmb]

Check out the Mirrordot mirror of the story. The original text was:

IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

Seems someone has edited the article.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Anonymous Coward]

Most are, but then you have the occasional game that isn't for kids, like Eternal Darkness. That game ROCKED.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[westlake]

But the real question here is why don't they make small, cheap HDTVs? Why does everything have to be 40"+ plasma screen? Why can't they make 24" CRT HDTVs? Or do they make them and just not market them?

It is the big screen experience that sells.

This is the sci-fi technology Popular Science has been promising the television audience since the 1950's. Television as The Jetsons know it, televison as The Incredibles know it.

We don't have flying cars but we do have this. In color, high definition and in multichannel theater sound. Interactive and affordable. $1700 at Walmart.

I think Nintendo has badly underestimated what HD brings to the market.

This writeup is unfair.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Twice as powerful is pretty damn powerful, and besides, no one reasonably expected them to develop a Cell equivalent. I mean, damn.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Daxster]

If you put a higher resolution on the general average of TV screens (say, 24-32"), it will not significantly improve image quality. If you increase the size of the screen without increasing resolution..well we all know it looks like poop.

What will developers and game investors think?

[Knutsi]

I've commented earlier that I think Nintendo is tyring to hit a special marked with this console, and this controller, in an attempt to bring gaming to a broader audience. Capturing the old gamer's nostalgia for the old NES/SNES/N64 games is of course also a wise move.

But when I saw these specs, someone poured cold water down by neck. If you where a developer, would you invest in a platform like this? I mean, its basically an XBox. I'm thinking it will smell good for all those strange Japanese games that would not sell well in the West, but not for those who develop the other stuff... for the first time, I'm actually worried. Hopefully Nintendo won't be the only ones developing titles for this system! (like seems to be the state of the GameCube these days... I've not bought a NGC game since Wind Waker...)

But as I've said before, I think Nintendo is a smart company, and they will probably pull it through. Either that or they will be reduced to a Japan-only game company, and fail the next generation console launch in five-six years.

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[GrumblyStuff]

Look at it this way: Would you want to make a fun game using a very interesting control mechanism or work on high resolution texture maps and half a mill. poly character meshes?

Ok, ok. I suppose the latter works well for the slave-driving management of EA but I doubt you'd want to work there as a peon; being a slave-driver could be fun and profitable!

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are already about fifty posts above yours that already address the Revolution's underpowered specs, their lack of importance, and the arbitrary nature of the comparison. I won't bother elaborating.

In terms of development, Revolution is looking to be the favourable target. Speaking as a programmer, I'd hate to be programming on the Cell. Eight cores for what is essentially--when you get down to it--a linear render loop? XBox is an easier target, having DirectX 10 and Live. Either way, Revolution's development cycle will be, by comparison, will be a walk in the park.

There is plenty of evidence of general developer and gamer good-will towards the Revolution on the internet, even without the massive amounts of hype that its competitors employ continuously. And, unlike the last generation arms race, this time it isn't a comparison of raw render-power. (PS2 graphics were inferior to Gamecube graphics in the end, anyways! What's up with that?)

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[Knutsi]

I think a high quality game requires high quality and quantity of workmanship. Look at the great Epics, such as Final Fantasy. Nintendo has done allot of Mario Party stuff for a while, and I think there is a limit to how long that is interesting. Of course it will yeild good result to be inovative, but I strongly suspect this will lead to this system being wastly more popular in Japan than in the EU and US, where the market for these small-fun-and-inovative games have traditionally been bigger.

Also, lets not forget that to be inovative in way such as the EyeToy, you need processing power. I bet the EyeToy people can do amazing things with the PS3 that the Revolution just won't handle. How EyeToy manages what it does on the PS2 is amazing to me.

In any event, lets see where it goes. Its good we have a contender in the battle for our spare hours that dares think outside the cube...uhm...box. ;D So no matter where we go, we'll all stand to gain from the competition. Long live market economy ;)

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[Jetekus]

If you where a developer, would you invest in a platform like this?
I can't remember the exact numbers, but I remember reading that a developer's kit will be far far cheaper for the Revolution than for the 360/PS3. If that leads to more crazy indie games, then I'm all for it.

Whenever I boot up the PS2 with friends I always show them this bizarre game I got for £3 called Gitarro Man about a boy with a talking dog who has a guitar that shoots lightning at aliens while playing crazy japanese rock. Everyone loves it and it usually delays putting in Timesplitters for some time. And it sure as hell wasn't developed by EA.

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[GrumblyStuff]

Indeed Nintendo seems to have been negelecting it's regular console in favor of the DS. But they still got the golden touch. Second party developers make some great games. Further proof of the golden touch (or the lack of it): Rare ;-D

There is, however, a problem with the EyeToy. People bitch and moan about the Revolution's controller, "imagine having to swing your arms around for a couple hours," but isn't the EyeToy worse in that regard? I'll plead ignorance on it's operation but from what I've seen of the commercials, you stand and play the game. The new controller doesn't have to be swung around; I'm sure the video touting what it could do was exaggerating to get the point across. I suppose the EyeToy commercial could be doing the same but uh... will whatever. I think (hope) I made my point. :P

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[masklinn]

I think a high quality game requires high quality

Please, pretty please, don't mix "high quality" and "high quality graphics", they are not the same and good games never needed good graphics to be good.

Check Lucas Arts' adventure games such as Sam&Max, The Day of the Tentacle or the Monkey Islands. Were they good games? Damn yeah! Did they have awesome graphics? No, not even at that time.

Even if it was still needed, the DS proved that the raw power doesn't matter, it beats the living hell out of the PSP while having much lower specs, and a much worse graphic system.

Also, lets not forget that to be inovative in way such as the EyeToy, you need processing power.

Dude, EyeToy? Innovative? Who the hell are you kidding?

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[kisrael]

Also, lets not forget that to be inovative in way such as the EyeToy, you need processing power. I bet the EyeToy people can do amazing things with the PS3 that the Revolution just won't handle. How EyeToy manages what it does on the PS2 is amazing to me.

It might not be as amazing as you think. I only have the original EyeToy game set, but it seems like it's almost all "sihlouette" based...they show you your whole body, but it's not even, say, recognizing your head from your hands from legs for the most part... and Myron Krueger was doing that like 30 years ago.

I do admit there are somethings, especially like world-modeling and using aspects of artifical life to populate a universe, that might be more feasible with sheer raw processing power. (In fact I resent that with the current generation of GTA games, even the ports are based around some of PS2's limitations, the way cars at an intersection will disappear when you do a 360)

Also, I think Eye Toy was *exactly* the sort of thing Nintendo should have been doing, much cooler than the drums, microphone, or even GBA-as-miniscreen that GC had this time around. The sheer installed base of PS2 attracts some interesting projects...Katamari being the most blatant example (in fact I think its very earliest prototyping was on GC), but stuff like Magic Pengel and what not as well.

Re:What will developers and game investors think?

[kisrael]

Yeah, take a look at these (RealPlayer, bleh) videos... this stuff was being done in 1975, and what EyeToy might do better...showing the whole image not a shadow, being a little smoother, not needing a blank background...adds that much more to the difficulty of what's being done.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a single person in my family has HDTV. Even my dad, who is pretty well off, saw the price difference between a good HDTV and an excellent 4:3 TV and got the 4:3 TV. I won't get rid of my old TV until it malfunctions and becomes a paper weight. Other family members simply don't care about TV, and one is so cheap that he'll avoid buying HDTV until there is simply no alternative.

Couple that with tight savings rates and substantial consumer debt rates...how will people afford those big TVs at the stores?

Re:Must be a mistake...

[Anonymous Coward]

We get the reference, but that's a pretty misguided attempt at humour if I've ever seen one. A bad pun, an extremely tenuous link ("LOLOL THEY'RE BOTH AMINALS!"), and a H2G2 reference thrown in for good measure do not a +5 Funny make.

One more thing: Delivery, delivery, delivery.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[wmacgyver]

You can always use your monitor/LCD panel with Xbox 360 via VGA.

One word: Oblivion

[js_sebastian]

There's at least one good game for the XBox360. Elder scrolls oblivion.

of course it's not going to make me buy the box cause I play it on my PC. For the kind of complex RPG or strategy games that I like, I think the PC is a better platform because the keyboard provides more flexible controls.

Although in the case of Oblivion they've kind of nerfed the keyboard I think, probably to make it more similar to the Xbox version.
As an example you use the tab key to go in all the character menus, maps and inventory, and do not have keyboard shortcuts such as M for map or I for inventory. And you can only set numbers 1 through 8 as hotkeys: why not 9 and 0??? just to make it similar to the xbox version which (i'm guessing here) uses 4 buttons for this, times 2 by using some modifier button.

Bzzzt

[GarfBond]

However, it's important to remember that there is no way to accurately gauge the performance difference between GCN's PowerPC-based architecture and the the Intel-based CPU of Xbox 360.

Very wrong. Both GCN/Revolution and X360 make use of PPC-derived cores. Xbox original made use of a Celeron/P3 proc. Somewhere in here there's a major typo.

Re:Bzzzt

[Noishe]

Yes, but the XBOX 360 uses the x86 architecture. Something that has been around for decades and is long overdue for an update. The revolution uses a completely different architecture, one that has been designed from scratch using modern information and methods.

Even comparing the cores or architectures of two processors is stupid though, take alook at the Athlon64 and the Opteron. About the only difference in a single core CPU is the cache and suport for ECC ram, they both have almost identical cores. But a 2Ghz Opteron will floor a 2 Ghz Athlon64

Re:Bzzzt

[Anonymous Coward]

Errr, actually, the PPE isn't x86. It's kind of a crippled PowerPC (or, atleast, the one in the PS3 is. I'm not so sure about the X360 ones). The PS3 uses it's PPE to act as a scheduler of sorts for the SPEs, and the X360 has three of them to share whatever processing workload there is.

Also, it's hard to say what the Revolution processor is yet. If it's just an overclocked Gekko, that's a PPC750 with an additional instruction set. I hope that it is that it's, atleast, a different, newer PPC750 design that has a better floating point unit, and a much larger cache. There was one that was developed but was never used in any computer.

The only benefit to not making dramatic changes to the existing Gekko design is that developers won't have to learn/use any new tricks. It won't look as good, but it should be a helluva lot cheaper.

DS vs. PSP

[Belgand]

This argument, while still speculation at this point since the Revolution hasn't been released, seems to mirror the current predicament of the DS and the PSP.

On paper the PSP is vastly more powerful. It has a 333MHz CPU with 32 MBs of main memory. The DS, in comparison, has an ARM 9 running at 67 MHz and an ARM 7 running at 33 MHz. On the RAM side it has 4 MBs of system memory as well as 32K of processor RAM for both ARM 7 and ARM 9, and 656K of VRAM. This should totally blow the DS out of the water and admittedly the PSP looks very, very nice.

Yet, the DS is well on it's way to making the PSP little more than a portable video player that offers a few games. While there are endless areas of speculation (e.g. the much higher cost of the PSP, the unique controls of the DS) I feel it really comes down to the games. Quite simply the DS has much, much better games and a pretty good library of them. The PSP has... uh... Lumines, GTA:LCS, Mega Man Powered Up and I've heard good things about Daxter. Even among the games available most of them haven't really seemed to inspire people to talk about them nearly as much as the DS's library.

Sure a few games work because they use the unique aspects of the DS (e.g. Kirby: Canvas Curse, Nintendogs) but the vast majority don't. A few (e.g. Castlevania, Phoenix Wright) aren't even first-party titles... though admittedly almost all of the top titles are.

It's just that when it comes down to it the system that people tend to prefer is the one with better games. Not flashier graphics, not more raw power on paper. I can't say that sales figures will necessarily back this up because, honestly, Sony and Microsoft both have their fans and a good enough stranglehold on the market at this point that they aren't likely to be upset very easily. But in the end this battle of specs over games has already more or less been won and the victor clearly seems to be the less-powerful, but more enjoyable machine from Nintendo.

Re:DS vs. PSP

[Queer Boy]

A few [...] aren't even first-party titles... though admittedly almost all of the top titles are."

Hmm, I seem to remember when people bought a Genesis or an SNES just because of the exclusive first-party games. Now people act like that's a bad thing.

Re:DS vs. PSP

[MS-06FZ]

I love the DS, for a while I didn't think I was going to get the DS or the PSP, but ultimately the DS won me over - mainly it just seemed like the more interesting platform to me - as someone who is interested in making games I felt like the dual screens and touch sensor had more potential for interesting game development than the raw power of the PSP did. And I've had loads of fun with my DS since I got it - and I haven't even bought Advance Wars yet. My main problem with the PSP was always the limited selection of games that interested me. Darkstalkers seemed moderately interesting, Armored Core would have been interesting if it was about piloting robots instead of watching the AI pilot a robot, and I thought "Mercury" was excellent when I played it - a perfect example of what can be accomplished when you combine a good game premise with hardware capable of doing the thing right. But for the most part I didn't feel like there was too much on the PSP worth my attention - especially for such a big bulky thing (I seem to have gotten past the "bulkiness" issues, since I bought a DS which is pretty much the same size).

I would say the PSP is picking up speed as a gaming platform, though. "Mega Man Powered Up"? How about "Mega Man X: Maverick Hunter"... That is a game I find really tempting. Capcom seems to be giving the platform some much-needed attention lately.

As for the DS - when I'm playing it I'm usually not bothered by the technical limitations. I don't care that a lot of the background objects in Mario Kart aren't actually 3-D, for instance... I am moderately bothered by the fact that the system can't manage full-framerate 3-D on both screens at once, which seems to often make one screen be almost wasted... But when I look at the platform as a developer, considering projects I might write for the device, I start to feel more constrained by the limitations. The DS simply would not be capable of something like Armored Core. (well, I guess it could do the equivalent of Armored Core 1...) As a 3-D platform it's very limited - I almost feel that you have to see the DS as a 2-D platform. And their decision to give the system only 4MB RAM seems almost insane. What would 16MB or 32MB have cost them? It's hard to believe that it would have been a significant cost, and since DS cartridges aren't memory-mapped it seems like a foolish choice to me to limit the RAM space so drastically.

I think maybe Nintendo is looking at games transitioning from being a total specialty to more generally "electronic toys". The super-low-end electronic games (such as the TV game joysticks) in the $10-$20 range have reached the point of SNES quality, or better. The super-high-end consoles still exist, naturally - I think they're predicting a spectrum of home gaming, in which there has to be a middle player in between the two extremes for now, and in which in the next generation the distinction between the high and middle ranges may disappear altogether.

Re:DS vs. PSP

[faragon]

On paper the PSP is vastly more powerful. It has a 333MHz CPU with 32 MBs of main memory. The DS, in comparison, has an ARM 9 running at 67 MHz and an ARM 7 running at 33 MHz.

That's incorrect: the PSP has two R4000-like MIPS processors (PLL clock genenator from 1 to 333MHz). Despite opinions about games, the PSP is ahead in every single technical aspect: computational power, graphic capabilites, etc.

Re:DS vs. PSP

[Lehk228]

the PSP is ahead in every single technical aspect: computational power, graphic capabilites, etc.

especially load times, the PSP's loading times are FAR higher than the DS, why did nintendo have to suck so bad?

Re:DS vs. PSP

[Belgand]

Personally I like the fact that the DS doesn't do 3d graphics very well as I tend to greatly favor keeping games in 2d rather than trying to shoehorn a series into 3d. Yeah Ocarina of Time and Metroid Prime were a lot of fun... but in my mind the best console games were from the SNES: A Link to the Past, Super Metroid, Super Mario World. These are the games I love, not the latter-day versions that have buckled to the urge that everything must be made 3d or it'll be old and lame and the 13 year-olds won't play it.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Random Destruction]

Yeah screw them. I'll make my own console, with blackjack and hookers... on second thought, forget the console... and the blackjack

Good news for gamers

[Scott Swezey]

Maybe I should have read the whole article, or some of the comments here, but one thing that caught my eye was the controller and affordable price. It's good to see a company realizing that uber l337 super graphics dont make a good game (not that they hurt), but that innovative ideas, fun, and something people can actually afford lead to fun. (Sorry, but 800$ for the PS3??!! Or something like that, right? To much for me to afford, I have a life to pay for, outside of my play station (What do they say: live in your world, play in ours?))

Anyways, Sony should take a page from nintendo's book. And hopefully nintendo already figured out the region free / no-drm-crap stuff from sony.

</rant>

Re:Good news for gamers

[Vo0k]

If PS3 is just a gaming station, then $800 is outrageous.
If it features a blu-ray video player, you get a $2000 blu-ray player with a $1200 discount and a free game console thrown in.

(and using technology that due to being so advanced requires $10mln facility to make a copy of disk is about the best piracy counter-measure I know. Now somebody try pirating a 60GB blu-ray disk with a game using home equipment!)

But as result, you get just that, uber-1337 media player with a free game console thrown in, and treated by Sony just that way.

Re:Good news for gamers

[Mprx]

Why copy the disc when you can hack the console to run games from hard drive?

Re:Good news for gamers

[Vo0k]

Why hack the console when there are no games worth playing?

Re:Innovative?

[youknowmewell]

Fascinating, yet irrelevant. The Vectrex didn't shape the way current controllers are today. The rumble wasn't used by game-console controllers until after Nintendo did it. Wireless controllers that don't suck (as another poster put it) weren't around until Nintendo made them. With the Revolution controller Nintendo will blaze a new trail, adding motion sensors and nunchuck design that works for both right-handed and left-handed people to the list of controller designs that Nintendo makes and every one copies.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Zangief]

I don't think so. It is just that Nintendo sometimes hates risks.

The problem with HD now, is that there isn't one standard. People have lots of different TVs that do HD at different resolutions.

And that just part of the market. About 10% of people now have HD displays. Yes, this can only grow, but the time isn't right for Nintendo.

I'm sure, that, by the time of Xbox 1080 (they jumped 720), Playstation 4 (Sony is boring) and Nintendo Apocalypse Now (People like ominous trademarks!) come, Nintendo will support HD, in whatever form the market has adopted as standard.

Re:Innovative?

[Bega]

So what you're saying is, that the current controller form is the ultimate-be-all-have-all -form that's ever going to be needed, even after say, 30 years (if gaming exists then)? All I have to say for you is; Xbox is hueg. Xbox360 power supply hueg.

Re: no goldeneye

[L0k11]

argh.... that definately puts a dampener on it. of course we dont really know till it happens but... dammit!

i never really got to play secret of evermore... and my mates and I had some imagination that we could relive our childhoods via internet play of goldeneye.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[moro_666]

But if you look at the selection of games for nintendo, you'll see for yourself that an old 'wow' and 'hl2' fans don't really have much to play.

  I sometimes run n64 here in the emu, tv consoles are just too cumbersome for me to use. n64 loads the games really fast (compared to psx), and they have good graphics. the visual part is fun, it's nice to see that most games are without any kind of violence whatsoever (a'la you fall on your butt and are just unhappy when you crash in a flying simulator). but sometimes you just want the 'action', and nintendo doesn't really provide it.

  If i'd have a kid, a nintendo would be a quite safe bet. PS(x/2/3) & Xbox(/360) would be big nono's ...

  PS. Would you ppl thin that there'd be any kind of chance to talk to the console games developers so they'd rebuild their applications for linux ? We'd get a nice big set of quality games at normal speed (instead of the lagbehind emus)...
  Nethack was fun for years but it's beginning to fade ...

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[CrackedButter]

I don't own any consoles, all I have is a mac and we all know its short of games compared to windows, it'll never have its depth of titles. However, for some time now I've been hankering over a portable console, two of my friends has the PSP, yeah it looks nice and all but I think I am going to go with the DS simply because its cheaper and I don't plan to buy a lot of games, the cost of entry is much lower and i'm a 25 year old student.

Its all about the games

[Beer Monster]

I am a games player I like to play games, and thats how I choose whether I buy a console, I have what I call my 3 game rule, if there are 3 games on a console I want to play then I buy it, its that simple. Its not about the MHz value or MBs value its all about the games. Nintendo sees that and I think alot of other games players do also. Its going to be intresting to see how it all pans out.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Leto-II]

Why can't they make 24" CRT HDTVs? Or do they make them and just not market them?

26" CRT HDTVs are pretty common. Small LCD HDTVs are also common. But yes, they are not marketed as much as their larger brethren.

Holy sh*t someone let the Nintendo fanbois out!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I just read through the whole thread, and basically every single post is raving on about how good Nintendo is. To all those people who say "Nintendo makes fun games", I used to be a Nintendo fanatic. That was until the Gamecube. Sure the games on it may be fun, but how many games are there? I'm sorry but I'm going to put my money where the volume of good games are..and that ain't Nintendo. I'm not gonna take sides with Sony or Microsoft coz they both have their hits and flops, but Nintendo has lost me. Fun != Waiting 2 years for a decent game to come out.

Re:Price Point--playability not graphics?-egads!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a gamer either (at least, not a console gamer), and even I'm considering getting a Revolution. Nintendo has hit it right on the head by ignoring the performance war. It sounds to me like they're getting back to basics--interesting games with good playability (evidenced by that snazzy new controler of theirs). All the new games, availability of the older Nintendo library, and now the entire 16 bit era (snes, genesis, and tg16), all on one machine. Price it right, and they'll manage to reel in a customer who hasn't bought a console since the early 90's.

Graphics may look pretty, but living in the PC world, I've found myself getting disaffected by all the eye candy these days. When my graphics card died, I put my old GeForce 4 MX back in and I don't really miss the faster one. It runs the game I've been playing most lately--Zelda: A Link to the Past. I wish Nintendo success in this latest generation.

The Real horsepower of Nintendo?

[Vo0k]

The Real horsepower of Nintendo will come with the new Zelda game.
In form of Epona.
Both literally and figuratively :)

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Mprx]

As I can easily tell the difference between SD and HD content on my 19" CRT, this is obviously false.

Lol less megahurtz, its gonna be bad

[Anonymous Coward]

The article linked to here is pathetic. It must have been written by a 12 years old gamer.

Dude, it's 5 GHz! So what.

yes, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

can it run Linux?

Funny, isn't it?

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

I always found the Slashdot attitude about graphics to be strange - more of a reaction against the common wisdom than anything really thought out. Every time a new NVIDIA card comes out, there are 200 comments about how it's unnecessary. About how the old card was just fine.

Let me say this - graphics are important. Of course gameplay is more important, but there's no reason that we can't have both. I want a system that can push an HDTV. I want a system that can push loads of special effects and maintain a constant 60fps. I want more realistic characters, larger environments, and smarter AI.

The Gamecube is a fine system. I one one myself. When the Revolution ships, I'll probably get one - I like the idea of playing 20 years of games on a system. I think that the controller will be cool, and while I'm not sure if it will be practical, I'm willing to bet taht the Big-N will come up with some cool applications. But I do not for a second believe that the Revolution is a replacement for the XBOX 360 or the PS3. I'm glad that Microsoft and Sony are pushing graphics forward. And I'm disappointed that Nintendo isn't doing the same. Having an affordable system is important, but why is the Revolution limited to 83MB of memory? How much does 256M of DRAM really cost? And why can't it output at least 480p? Even my Gamecube could output 480p.

It's looking more and more like the Revolution is just an updated Gamecube. But by the time the Revolution ships, the 'Cube will be more than 5 years old. Can't Nintendo do a little better?

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[BenjyD]

Good graphics are nice (look at RE4, for example), but many people have a limited budget for gaming. The more they have to spend on the console, the less they have left for games. A console without any games isn't much fun.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[NekoXP]

It will output 480p according to Nintendo.

But 480p isn't dual 1080p at 120Hz like the PS3 can do, so it must be complete shit!!!!1

I have an HDTV and seriously just having the big screen and the higher dot pitch makes
it worthwhile playing PS2 and Gamecube games compared to a standard TV. The better color
definition from the component output gives a new lease of life to Metroid Prime, and even We 3 Katamari.

People forget that most people are running the older consoles through Composite or S-Video to their TV and haven't seen crystal clarity, bright colors, with no wavy lines or crawling. Moving to a SD progressive scan TV is awesome. Moving to an HDTV even at that
"low resolution" is just as awesome.

I will say something though.. I am a little worried about Virtual Console on TVs that can actually support HD inputs, nice clear screens, especially TFTs - the golden era of NES, SNES and N64 games that were running at 320x240 look absolutely terrible 32" wide with pixels the size of a baseball. Playing games like Ocarina of Time on the Gamecube (came free with Wind Waker) is so muddy and gross. Walking around the market place to the cathedral, with the static backgrounds, rolling around on Epona and having a green swathe of poo scroll past.. it looked great on a 14" fishbowl portable TV set but I couldn't even get past the first few quests in progressive scan.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[Anonymous Coward]

but there's no reason that we can't have both

buget constraints, developer time, code complexity, ...

Fact is, some game with thousands of man hours spent just getting the character design done, cast, shot, etc... will have less capability of making every aspect of the game fun because each aspect of the game may be an order of magnitude more comlpex to manipulate than for a simple game.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[not-admin]

why is the Revolution limited to 83MB of memory? How much does 256M of DRAM really cost?

You have to remember, this is 1T-SRAM.
A.K.A. Static RAM.
Which is faster than DRAM.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[Carrot007]

> I want a system that can push an HDTV

Well you may wannt sit out this round and wait for ps4 / xbox 720 (or whatever) becasue nothing will this time round.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[GrumblyStuff]

I want more realistic characters, larger environments, and smarter AI.

Only two of those are necessary. Frankly, I'm getting stick of ZOMG SUPA REALISTIC GRAFIX! It's nice and all but lately it's just generic FPS/sports sim/car sim.

Why do 2D games have to die? Why can't games just have style and artistic direction?

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[Kupek]

But I do not for a second believe that the Revolution is a replacement for the XBOX 360 or the PS3.

Nintendo's stated goal is to not compete with the PS3 and the 360. With a rumored initial price of $100, they might actually be able to achieve that goal.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[AnyoneEB]

Maybe the scaling problem will occur to Nintendo and they will use a fancy scaling algorithm like you can in most NES and SNES emulators. Or maybe not.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[NekoXP]

Blurring it up with a bilinear filter makes it look worse on a big TV or monitor; eye strain the same way you get with Ocarina of Time being blown up to 480p..

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[AnyoneEB]

I meant something like scale2x, but I suppose I have never checked to see what it looks like on a TV.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[NekoXP]

That's kind of neat in principle. It doesn't really work in real life though - static screenshots are awesome until you put them on your monitor and move them.

Makes you glad all the "new" games are all 3D and can be graphically enhanced like Halo/Halo 2 on the XBox/XBox 360.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[AnyoneEB]

Actually, that type of scaling looks beautiful on ZSNES on a regular CRT or LCD screen. (I say that type because while ZSNES supports scale2x, it supports some similiar algos that I find look better.) The scaling makes some assumptions that make it only look good with 2D video game graphics or similiarly simple graphics (like diagrams). Enlarging a photo with scale2x would just look awful. The problem is more that on a regular television, NES and SNES games do not really look pixelated, so the positives of this type of scaling are questionable.

Re:Funny, isn't it?

[maxterpiece]

the people on here post a "reaction to the common wisdom" because the common wisdom is just that - common wisdom. That is to say, everyone already knows it. There's no point in pointing out a point that has already been permitted into public... uhhh... knowledge.

Graphics are important. But you don't play the graphics, you play the game. If every post-atari game developer was lobotomized so that their entire sense of creativity and playability was removed, then they could be developing on a system that is eons ahead of our current technology, and it would be of no consequence. No one would want to play the games.

If nintendo makes a system with more fun games, then people will buy that system. It doesn't matter if there's a P4, a celeron or a dancing goat inside the freakin' thing.

In conclusion, people want to play fun games.

specs

[Anonymous Coward]

Matt from IGN posted something on the Nintendo forums...

-------------------
So we've posted an updated look at the Revolution specs and the message boards have collectively imploded. A quick browse through some threads shows that Nintendo fans are by and large in an uproar over the console's power. This is an unfortunate eventuality, and also one that stems mostly from a mentality that insists Nintendo is competing with Microsoft and Sony, which it isn't.

As could be predicted, a few stupidly devoted posters out there refuse to budge from their position that Nintendo can do no wrong, and have as a result launched a counter-attack against IGN or, even better, me. Some incredible (nintendo wont let me type the word had to edit it) on another forum even referred to me colorfully as "Assamassina," which I admit is a pretty cool handle; I have used it once or twice myself. This same person then called into question my credibility, saying that my track record speaks for itself. Indeed, it does. If you've read the Nintendo section of IGN for any amount of time, you know that we have our sources, we break stories, and far more often than not, our information is accurate. I don't need to defend myself beyond that.

These Revolution specs should come as no surprise to most people. Back in December we reported more or less the same thing without hard numbers. Let's move past that, though. Nintendo's own leaders have stated more times than can be counted that Revolution is not a console focused on horsepower. Its executives have flat-out dismissed the possibility of high-definition graphics on the system. When Revolution is the topic, three words keep coming up: small, quiet, affordable. Where does massive horsepower fit into this equation?

Even so, I want to be clear on the point that hardware specs rarely tell the full story. We listed Xbox's CPU and GPU speeds compared to Revolution's, but readers should not assume that they are really comparable. These are different architectures. Fact is, GameCube's PowerPC-based Gekko CPU and ATI-developed Flipper GPU held their own against Xbox despite the fact that Microsoft's console's speeds were -- on paper -- dramatically faster. Further, these specs do not account for bandwidth, RAM speed, and other important factors. I expect that when Revolution finally surfaces, it will be a console whose strengths are greater than the sum of the parts we've listed thus far. Please, please keep that in mind.

At the same time, if you're still holding out for the miracle, do me a favor and stop. It seems that every time we write anything hardware related, there are the skeptics with the retaliatory comment, "Why does IGN post hearsay as fact? Nobody has final development hardware!!11111" Yes, the "1s" are there to demonstrate that these people are freak-in' morons. I did not wake up today, roll into the office and write a piece of literary fiction for readers to enjoy in lieu of legitimate news. This is not "hearsay" or rumor. These specs we post, they are copy/pasted to us directly from Nintendo's latest (as in, in the last couple of weeks) Revolution documentation. Quoted to us verbatim. And these quotes do not come from creatures that exist inside my head. I am talking with numerous development sources with hardware; people who have been briefed by Nintendo about what to expect from the final machine. Some of these people are preparing games to show at E3 2006, which is one month away. in short, they know what to expect; they aren't working with old materials; they aren't relaying old specs; and we aren't posting out-of-date information.

Is everything set in stone? Nope. If history has taught me anything, it's that hardware specs can and do change. Xbox 360 had 256MBs of RAM during a major phase of the development cycle. That number only doubled later in the cycle, likely after Sony relayed specs for PlayStation 3 to studios. That being true, there's always the chance that some of Revolution's numbers may change before the system finally hits retail shelv

Re:specs

[markhb]

...a mentality that insists Nintendo is competing with Microsoft and Sony, which it isn't.

Is he just referring to the graphics v. gameplay comparison he mentions in the final paragraph, or is he talking about something more? Does anyone have any clarification, or at least an idea, what he means by the "not competing" comment?

Re:Holy sh*t someone let the Nintendo fanbois out!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, it's a story about the Revolution. Discussing Nintendo is entirely justified.

Sure, its games may be fun
Isn't that all that counts?

So, quantity over quality, eh? Sure, there are about a million Playstation movie franchise titles that take a minute to load each level, if that's your thing. Gamecube has a lineup of games very comparable to Playstation's, but that ultimately depends on one's tastes.

In the meantime, 360's game library is pitiful, geometry wars being its greatest offering, and PS3 isn't coming out until 2007. Oh, wait a minute! Revolution is reverse compatible with almost all of Nintendo's previous consoles! Holy shit indeed!

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[jchenx]

I wish I could mod you up.

You'd think that of all sites, that Slashdot readers are future-thinking enough to see that HDTV adoption rate is only going to get better and better. I see it as the next DVD phenomenon.

For one, it's extremely obvious to people the difference between SDTV and HDTV. It instantly has the "wow!" factor. Next, HDTVs are becoming the next big-ticket item to get in a household. It's like the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" scenario. Once you've got a friend/relative/co-worker that has one and keeps boasting about it, it doesn't take that long before others start thinking about it. It's essentially just a huge trophy to brag about. Think status symbol.

So, are HDTVs costly? Sure they are, but the price is constantly going down. Plus, these are things that people do save for, even when they ought to be saving for something more important (house, college tuition, etc.). Every holiday season I run into more and more people bragging about their new sweet HDTV. And now that we're starting to get DVRs and video game systems that actually take advantage of the full resolution, it's only going to get better.

Am I biased? Sure am. After watching movies, HD TV shows, football, amd playing video games on my DLP HDTV, I can't help but think positively about it. Everyone who comes and checks it out always has their jaw drop ... and more than a few people now have bought their own. Welcome to middle-class splurging people. Coming soon to a Walmart near you.

That said, Blu-ray/HD-DVD are technologies I DON'T see going very far. Primarily because you don't have a huge leap in quality anymore. It may end up becoming much like the Laserdisc, IMHO. Maybe a decade from now, when virtually everyone has an HDTV, it will really make a come-back.

Still the only 'next gen' ill buy

[otterpop378]

A few reasons why I don't give a crap about the specs:
Pikmin
Monkey Ball
Legend of Zelda
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance

Just because the graphics aren't the most optomized to play the latest disposable first-person-shooter, doesn't mean it's inferior.

Re:Still the only 'next gen' ill buy

[doon]

I have a xbox, a ps2, a game cube. My favorite by far is the cube. Between the Zelda and Mario I don't need anything else. To me gameplay and fun factor are the most important. You can make a turd really pretty and it will still be a turd :) Last week my brother and I (bad Idea to to put 2 guys in a big box electronic store with Credit Cards) decided to get new toys. I grabbed a GBA SP and him a DS (4 hours later I had a DS also -- thank you 24 hour walmart). I haven't been able to to put it down. I have been playing minish cap for a while and I forgot how much fun games like that are. Also with the GBA, playing PacMan Vs is a great time. 1 person plays oldskool pacman on the GBA, 3 other are ghosts in 3d on the cube. It is the tie in like that, that makes Nintendo awesome. I cannot wait for the Revolution (or whatever they wind up calling it) to come out.

Re:Still the only 'next gen' ill buy

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy Crap! I didn't even think about Pikmin! That's it. I'm preordering at the first opportunity.

Re:Still the only 'next gen' ill buy

[WillAffleckUW]

exactly - it's all about the games.

I looked at the list of games - with pics - they showed, and so far, NR has way more fun games than any of the other consoles, plus they're cheaper to buy.

Sony's trying to catch up, and has a few cool games.

xBox360 - well, sorry, so far nothing if you're not into sports games or FPS. Other than cross-platform games.

Bullseye!

[Anonymous Coward]

I turn 28 in the Autumn, I have tons of disposable income, I grew-up with Nintendo, and I spend large chunks of it on Nintendo games.

I have no problem paying full price for Nintendo consoles and games. I have no problem buying Nintendo gifts for my nieces and nephews. This Christmas season, it'll be Revolution consoles and games for all of my gift-giving. This is my financial show of support, especially in a time when two non-gaming companies are trying to squeeze Nintendo out of a market that they have no business butting-into.

And the funny thing is.. in my workplace, there are a surprising number of other adults who feel the same way about Nintendo. People my age (mid-20's) and older. People who eat-up Smash Bros and Pikmin and Zelda. It shocked me at first, but now I consider it the norm..

So-called "hard-core" gamers - emotionally stunted and dependant-upon blood/bombs/boobs/bullets to feel "manly" - can try to play the tired old "maturity" card all they want - we lifelong Nintendo fans know better.

WOW

[ad0gg]

Wow its just like the nintendo powerglove!!!

Re:WOW

[zerOnIne]

Just keep your power gloves off her, ok?

Re:WOW

[mink]

You misspelled Mattel.

I'd rather play an innovative 8-Bit game than

[Ogemaniac]

Halo 42 on a zillion terrahertz processor with one google polygons/second.

Re:Innovative?

[Anonymous Coward]

>>There's a reason that console controllers have evolved into their current form, and that's because they are ergonomic and comfortable.

I think what you meant was "and that's because Nintendo leads the way every time."

And how many consoles copied the Gamecube controller? Or the N64 controller for that matter... Features were copied, but the overall design of either wasn't so great IMHO (and that of Microsoft, who copied the Dreamcast controller more than Nintendo's, which just right there is screwed up).

Nope. Uncanny Valley.

[Vo0k]

I want more realistic characters, larger environments, and smarter AI.

and then when you get them, you shout "Ick!". You just fell victim to the Uncanny Valley. If there was one thing to say I hate about TES4:Oblivion is the faces of characters. They fall right at the bottom of Uncanny Valley.

Realistic graphics is a trap Nintendo wants to avoid. Maybe the next one after Revolution will have it. The rest of the tricks can be done already.

They tried new directions and the new controller is really promising. Plus more games "from the era when games were fun".

Revolution really is not. It's more of a 'niche' where you can wait through the ice age where the games are now. It's a safe, fun, pleasant way to wait through the crisis. The 'new generation' consoles will be considered a failure, they don't bring -anything- new except of graphics and swing the graphics from the edge of Uncanny Valley right into its middle. The next generation of consoles will likely take it finally right, and developers will likely wake up and see it's not gfx it's all about. Then you'll get what you want, games with good gfx AND great gameplay. But for now it's either-or, and you have to choose. And wait through the crisis.

Re:Nope. Uncanny Valley.

[iapetus]

Which is nice, but frequently a moot point, because you can have more impressive graphics without going for realism.

Re:Nope. Uncanny Valley.

[Vo0k]

You can have more impressive graphics without more CPU/GPU power too.

Re:Nope. Uncanny Valley.

[Anonymous Coward]

"If there was one thing to say I hate about TES4:Oblivion is the faces of characters. They fall right at the bottom of Uncanny Valley."

What are you talking about? This woman is, without a doubt, the most attractive female I've ever seen.

Re:Holy sh*t someone let the Nintendo fanbois out!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it backwards compatible? Seen it running eh? Until its out its marketing speak as much as the whole PS3 is.

Re:Innovative?

[Jasupehmo]

Actually Nintendo has also stated that the shell is going to be used only to play the older games. All the "proper" Revolution games will use the controller as is and should not contain the support for this standard controller shell.

Re: no goldeneye

[KDR_11k]

and my mates and I had some imagination that we could relive our childhoods via internet play of goldeneye.

I've heard that Timesplitters is a suitable substitute.

half life 2 on revolution?

[etheriel]

Will the revolution be powerful enough to run hl2?

Re:half life 2 on revolution?

[akhomerun]

yes. at about 1.5x as fast as an xbox 1 (roughly), it will easily run HL2.

should be a little better than the xbox version.

now that's if they decide to port the game. valve's only commercial failure is the xbox version of HL2, they may not decide to do consoles again

..Additionally.

[catwh0re]

Also I might add to this that brief information they have given here is enough to ascertain that they are able to create just about any game they like on this hardware. What they won't be able to do is lazily program a game which has excessive use of polygons(even for background objects) and use excessive detail in pointless textures (no one really looks at grass and tree bark that much.)

This may sound a little bit zealotly but I back up nintendo's formal commentary that we've(as consumers) have sufficient hardware for quite a while to produce stunning looking, great playing games.

After all when something gets too detailed, you can just pre-render the object onto a more primitive figure (3d users are already familiar with this technique called amongst other titles "surface sampling"). Additionally there are newer 3d engines that use depth based calculations to determine how heavy a polygon should be I.e close up models are polygon rich, further models are not.

With the algorithm advancements we've had in the 3D sector, it's no surprise that the raw performance of the nintendo console hasn't increased significantly.

One final point to make is that nintendo games are usually highly stylised. So for the majority of their bread & butter titles programmers+designers are not seeking photo realism.

Re:..Additionally.

[mrchaotica]

Additionally there are newer 3d engines that use depth based calculations to determine how heavy a polygon should be I.e close up models are polygon rich, further models are not.

They just recently came up with that idea? I'd assumed they'd been doing that ever since 3D engines existed!

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Hitto]

I will kill your argument with only one proposition : You start paying the novelty tax, I'll root for you and call you the coolest kid on the block, and I'll buy a HDTV when it's dirt cheap.

We geeks are tech-savvy, not drug addicts. HDTV can wait.

iNtendo

[AlgorithMan]

doesn't the picture of that console remind you of Apple's recent products? (iPod, iBook, iMac)? I'll call this thing "iNtendo"... or maybe "NI! ntendo"

How easy will the backwards compatibility be?

[riker1384]

I would like to buy this if it's significantly better than the PS2 and if the legacy games are convenient. I have a bunch of NES and SNES games lying around, and I'd love to play them again, but I don't want to end up paying hundreds to buy all my old titles again. Is there any word on how much this feature will cost? If it's too much than it might be easier to just pull get old stuff on Ebay if my consoles or games don't work anymore. Also, I'd want to own the games and not just have a subscription.

It would be really neat if you could get a free game or big discount if you own an old (possibly busted) cartridge and you turn it in, or show it to a salesman or something.

Also for old time's sake it might be nice to pull out some old controllers. I'd like to see a cheap adapter for the old ones. The basic NES or SNES controller isn't that special and should be surpassed by modern controllers, but the NES Advantage, the Power Glove, Light Gun and others are different. It'd be nice to use those instead of having to buy various new controllers, especially since there's nothing else like the Power Glove that I'm aware of.

As an aside, damn I feel old. My toys aren't supposed to be ancient history.

Re:How easy will the backwards compatibility be?

[PhotoBoy]

Sadly Nintendo have been keeping quiet on the pricing of the game downloads. I would hope that they will be quite cheap but given how Nintendo were quite happy to charge full price for classic NES games on the GBA I have an uneasy feeling about the pricing. Obviously there's no cartridge, packaging or shipping costs with an electronic download so that should bring the price down a fair bit.

But I still reckon we might see pricing along the lines of $5 for NES games, $10 for SNES and $15 for N64. Which is too much IMHO. Something like $1 for NES, $2-$3 for SNES and $4-$5 for N64 would probably be OK.

Re:How easy will the backwards compatibility be?

[oscarmv]

I think they'll also do a lot of tie-ins. I.e. "Buy Zelda Revolution, download SNES A Link to the Past for free". That certainly would endear me to buy more games from them.

Re:How easy will the backwards compatibility be?

[PhotoBoy]

Yeah that would be good, I could also see some games being unlockable extras like the way the original Metroid was unlockable in Metroid Prime or the NES games in Animal Crossing.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[KDR_11k]

Nintendo thinks that an adult can play any game, they think only kids can't play all games because they shouldn't play violent games.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[KDR_11k]

The Gameboy was smaller than the Gamegear so calling it "brick" in a comparison doesn't make sense.

[OT] I can't resist, please mods be kind...

[hummassa]

Your sig:
"Your right to walk the streets unmolested by the police outweighs my right not to get blown up."

Woundn't it be "the right of 200 million people to walk the streets unmolested by the police outweighs the right of 4000 people not to get blown up" ?? --- especially in the light of "when the 200 million people can't walk the streets unmolested, many more than 4000 people *will* get blown up *because* of it"? :-) As I said in the subject, it's just irresistible to me...

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[KDR_11k]

Hudson is responsible for Mario Party. Is there anything they don't milk?

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Jetekus]

Hmm... I'm not sure I'd entirely agree with you that Nintendo don't like risks. I mean look at the initial reaction to the DS, or the Revolution's controller, or the cartoon look of Wind Waker. I think they are willing to take risks if they've put a lot of time into thinking about it and can justify it. Clearly in at least two of these examples, they made the right choice.

I think it's more to do with the fact that this risk is an exceptionally big one financially speaking. Sony and MS can afford to take the hit and lose billions if it all goes tits-up. Nintendo would be in more trouble.

Smooth upgrade path

[vhogemann]

Wow, Nintendo got it right!

Taking a look at the new revolution specs, you can see that it's just a GameCube with a faster processor, and a new video hardware. It seems to be the same overall architeture used on the GC, the fact that reports say that the early devellopment kits were overclocked GameCube consoles seems to confirm that.

Now, the Gekko processor was much the same as an G3 processor, the same used on those old colorfull iMacs. G3 processors, AFAIK, can now go up to little above 1GHz... So Nintendo can create at least one more generation of consoles using this processor, and after that they can demand a G4 clone from IBM, and gain extra float point performance from VMX/Altivec.

When first introduced, the CG Flipper GPU was told to be a little better than a ATI RADEON 7500, IRC. Let's guess that the Revolution GPU is somewhat better than a RADEON 9600. Now, that leaves Nintendo with a nice upgrade path for the GPU as well.

Nintendo doesn't need to expend trillions of money on R&D to come up with a new processor and GPU architeture for each new console they create, IBM and ATI already did it for them, and for at least two more generations!

No wonder why Nintendo can build cheaper consoles, and still make a profit from them...

Developers?

[Britz]

Are we on Slashdot or what?

Why is no one talking about developement tools for the Revolution, or for any of the other consoles for that matter? I heard that it was/is very difficult to develope for the PS2 for example. That (among licensing issues) forced out smaller developers. Maybe Revolution will have a very good, fast and easy developement platform and we will see many inovative titles from independent shops? Or they took a turn at Sony, or Microsoft ported Visual Basic?

Anyone got a clue? I clicked on comments to get some.

Re:Developers?

[masklinn]

Fron what I read, the Revolution SDK is very much like the GC SDK (since the console are quite close architecture-wise), and more than a few devs have stated that it's probably the best SDK of the current generation, a bazilion times better than anything Sony ever released.

And it's cheap to boot, which means that indie game devs will be able to afford it and still have enough food to eat until their release their game.

Re:Innovative?

[masklinn]

Do you realize that the "current form" of console controllers come straight from nin-fucking-tendo?

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[masklinn]

You'd think that of all sites, that Slashdot readers are future-thinking enough to see that HDTV adoption rate is only going to get better and better. I see it as the next DVD phenomenon.

It isn't. DVD versus VHS had MANY advantages: better image quality of course, and that's everything your HDTV gives you, but also sequential AND random access to chapters, bonuses (even though those have dwindled), superior sound quality, no rewind, fast access to your media, much smaller reader, constant quality of image (whereas a VHS's quality will lower every time you watch it), absolutely no chance whatsoever that your DVD will unwind into the reader and half-slaughter it.

HDTV has what? Higher resolution period. Whoa, paint me impressed.

Updated gamecube?

[hattig]

The article seems to imply that all that is different between the Gamecube and the Revolution are the clock speeds of the processor and GPU, and the amount of memory, both being 50% faster.

So in 5 years, and probably two process shrinks, these components can only be clocked 50% higher (within the cooling requirements of the revolution of course, which is quite thin)? Both processors are 1/4 of the size (assuming 90nm for Revolution and 180nm for the original Gamecube), so they must be pretty damn cheap if they're the same design.

No word on whether or not the graphics chip is wider (more pipelines), something that matters a lot in the graphics world as the task is very parallel. No word on if there processor has more cache, or two cores - stuff that could easily be done and still have a cheaper processor than the original Gamecube's.

I'm going to get a Revolution, simply because it is more affordable than the other options - I don't game that much, nor do I have a HDTV. OTOH if it's not that much faster than a Gamecube then maybe I should just keep on playing that, there's enough good games to last me a few years.

However whilst gameplay is the most important thing in a game (and the Revolution will have a lot of good points here), the impact of graphical splendour shouldn't be ignored. Shaders make a vast difference to a game - realistic water, accurately reflective metals, it adds atmosphere. If the Revolution is not going to have this relatively old technology inside, then we're basically talking about Gamecube graphics with more polygons.

I just worry about 3 years time. By then the 360 and the PS3 will be $200 or less, and they'll be a no-brainer purchase. A $99 Revolution may be a nice bedroom console still. Maybe Nintendo are putting off the really big update for a few years, so they have the first major update next time around. I've always thought that Sony should have clocked the slimline PS2 faster than the original, and allowed games to have a standard version for the original PS2, and a faster, smoother, higher-resolution version for the slimline. Not that Sony ever hurt for income from the PS2 :p

Re:This will be Nintendo's last console

[Goose In Orbit]

Missed out Pokémon though... ;^D

Re:Before there was Enemy Territory, there was E.T

[Mr_eX9]

Yeah, I know what it stands for, but I'll be damned if I know what it means.

utter irrelevance

[Ginger Unicorn]

I can't tell the difference between the graphics on a GC, PS2, XBox or Dreamcast.

When all's said and done about which hardware produces the finest graphics, if you sat and played say "burnout 5" on all three next gen consoles, you wouldn't notice any meaningful difference unless you put all three on simultaneously and scrutinised the screens.

So even if Revolution has lower rez graphics, you won't notice. Console graphics havent improved to any perceptible degree since the dreamcast. The higher poly race isnt worth running anymore. Not that i'm saying graphics wont get any better, just that it isnt crucial for the gameplay experience to stay on the bleeding edge.

I just thank god nintendo have done something interesting and new. I hope this new console is as alien and captivating as the N64 was when it came out. A large part of the mind-blowingly fun experience of Mario64 was having this wierd new controller to play with.

Re:Game consoles aren't all about powerful hardwar

[Anonymous Coward]

Games are about different things to different people. Give it a few years and it will be about something. If gaming is still mainstream, it will be about graphics. If it falls, then gameplay and storytelling(my AC fav) will come back.

We can only hope that it will be called Revolution. However, it's just as likely to be called Go

All I Care About is the Controller

[aplusjimages]

When I get a new system all I really care about is the controller. The graphics can be 8-bit for all I care. Thank you Nintendo for realizing this and making a system geared towards 1% of the gaming population because we feel left out when it comes to playing games on current consoles.

The Obvious "Adult" Market Joke

[frankthechicken]

Is there anything they don't milk?

Breasts?

Re:The Obvious "Adult" Market Joke

[KDR_11k]

They're a japanese company, I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a hard time believing that traditional gaming with prettier explosions will have a bigger "WOW" factor than the Revolution controller does. That thing makes me want to develop games just thinking about it.

MHZ myth

[cgenman]

I've worked on all three platforms. And while I haven't didn't do the coding myself, I have worked with the coders who did.

The rule of thumb was that if you could do it on the Xbox, you could do it on the GameCube and you would probably have to shave it down to get it to work on the PS2. The problem child you have to worry about in a cross-platform title is always PS2.

I don't know where Casamassina is getting his assertion that GC polygon peaks were less than the PS2. Does he mean untextured polys? Again the PS2 is generally the platform that you have to optimize for.

Using MHz numbers to compare the speed of different processors is like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how much gas they consume. There is a relationship there, but it isn't the primary one. And it isn't the one you care about.

There are all sorts of reasons for performance numbers, such as the PS2's surprisingly fast cache but low ram, etc. I hope someone will do a detailed technical breakdown, because I really should remember this stuff. And also financial pressures play a part: you add optimization time for the Xbox if you think you will sell in North America, and optimization time for the GameCube if you have the possibility of Japan sales. But in general, the Xbox and Game Cube are similar in power, and the PS2 runs to catch up.

I can't really talk about the Revolution, partially because I don't have one, but I've heard other developers use the "2x more powerful than the GC" figure. That puts it somewhere between the Xbox 1 and the Xbox 360.

Re:MHZ myth

[SirSlud]

Speaking as a production game developer (ie, I work on game logic, not engine code) you're pretty much dead on. We've got a game in the pipeline that we're releasing at 30 FPS on the PS2 .. runs on GC at 60 FPS, no problem. The main issue with the GC is that the ram is split between ram and aram, which leads to the requirement of micromanagement of ram use to ensure you're not wasting potential space. On cross-platform engines, its abit of a pain.

I agree with everything else tho. The GC was a shade less powerful than the Xbox, but as we've been shown again and again, its 20% hardware, and 80% how you use it. The Rev is plenty stronger than the Xbox.

Re:MHZ myth

[SilkBD]

Using MHz numbers to compare the speed of different processors is like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how much gas they consume.

More like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how many cylinders and horsepower it has...

Re:MHZ myth

[w3weasel]

More like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how many cylinders and horsepower it has...

It sounds as if you are claiming that MHz vs. MHz. is a fair comparison... so to elaborate..
A 500 horsepower, 12 cylinder, 6000cc engine in a sherman tank will turn in pitiful 0-60mph times, and would not even be able to reach 60mph due to the power to weight ratio.

A 50 horsepower (Nitrous burning) 1 cylander, 50cc moped would reach 60 mph in about 7 seconds.

How many benchmarks of a 2.4 GHz AMD vs 3.2 GHZ intel does it take to figure this out? When will joe consumer get it (thanks intel for your awesome chip naming scheme).

Re:MHZ myth

[HTL2001]

"Using MHz numbers to compare the speed of different processors is like comparing the speed of cars by looking at how much gas they consume. There is a relationship there, but it isn't the primary one. And it isn't the one you care about."

That is, by far, the best analogy I've heard to describe the Hz myth. I usually use something like taking small steps realy quickly, or making long strides somewhat slower.

Re:MHZ myth

[GotenXiao]

The PS2 came out in March 2000 (Japan). The Gamecube came out in September 2001 (Japan). The Xbox came out in November 2001 (US).

So, the latter two had a full year of technology advancement to take advantage of. Although in the case of the Xbox, there wasn't much innovation involved (can you say Pentium III, GeForce FX5200 and bog standard components?).

The Gamecube had far more innovative design features, and given its size, it's a damn good platform.

My personal favourite is the PS2, for a variety of reasons. However, saying that an FX60 outperforms an FX57, given the time gap between them, is kinda like saying a car built today is far superior to a car built in the 50s. Technology moves fast, as we all should know. Of course the Gamecube is going to look nicer and run faster without optimisation; it's newer technology. But given the fact that the PS2 is still outselling the Xbox even today (quote from Wikipedia: "Currently the PS2 has shipped 101 million consoles as of the end of 2005 compared to the GameCube's 21 million sold and XBox's 24 million sold.").

That suggests that maybe Sony did something right with the console. Just because it doesn't look quite as pretty doesn't neccesarily make it worse; I'd rather have line graphics on a VGA screen for an insanely fun game over a boring-as-fuck game with top-end graphics.

Re:MHZ myth

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its more like RPMs = MHz
Cylinders = pipelines
HP = total processing power

More RPM's doesn't always mean more HP.

Re:MHZ myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't get me wrong, I love the PS2. I also love the GC and Xbox, though for different reasons.

But the PS2 is the lighter-weight console of the previous generation. That doesn't make it bad, necessarily, that just means you have to plan your art pipeline for the delta in power.

On the other hand, the console I personally use most often is the PS2, so make of that what you will.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[tepples]

It is the big screen experience that sells.

Even in the bedroom? A big screen in every room needs more real estate, and not everybody can afford that.

$1700 at Walmart.

And a 19" TV for the bedroom costs one-tenth that.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Zigg]

Nintendo doesn't take risks on things that don't fundamentally enhance gameplay.

DS and Revolution do this. HD does not.

Teraflops

[chadamir]

Look into the claims that sony and microsoft have made about their systems being capable of multiple teraflops. Then go to the top 100 super computers and how much they cost and how many teraflops they can do. I trust none of these specs. I trust gameplay.

My secret word was contempt.

Re:Teraflops

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

If you noticed too,
The teraflops is a composite number. In implies that the multiple CPU cores along with the GPU's all add up to 1 teraflop of performance. So, you have 3 cores running at 200 GFlops and 1 GPU running at 400 GFlops, you have 1 teraflop of performance, right?

This is false advertising at its worse because, even for gaming, it is doubtful that you will ever get ALL CPU core's and GPU's running at maximum performance. Instead, load balance will be spread across the CPU cores and GPU, and you will probably never see peak performance exceeding 200 GFlops, and that really depends on how well the games are written for multi-threading.

If any of these systems had ONE GPU or CPU that was capable of 1 Teraflop of performance, then I would be impressed, but that isn't the case. Supercomputers can achieve composite performance values because their applications are specifically designed to spread across multiple CPU's and thus can achieve maximum performance. Game design isn't as efficient, or even can make use of multiple cores as effectively as dedicated scientific calculations or modeling.

So, I agree, that teraflop claim is a marketing gimmick. Its like saying my thing is bigger then your thing, its juvenile, and in the end, I respect Nintendo more then Sony or Microsoft for not buying into this performance envy crap.

Re:Nintendoh!

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember playing Timespliters 2 on PS2 and then on Gamecube, it was a whole lot faster on Gamecube and was more enjoyable all around. At the moment I am not gunna buy any of the consoles, but the real one that takes my eye is the revo because it seems the most fun. Then again, the DS seem really fun, but it got boring (didnt buy one but played it al lot)

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[jonnythan]

Several companies, including Toshiba and Samsung, market sub-30", sub-$600 widescreen HDTV's.

For example, $530 gets you a 26" Toshiba widescreen or 30" Insignia widescreen at Best Buy today.

Dual-Core Oranges

[bitkari]

To be fair, the claim by Apple that the Intel machines are "three times faster" isn't really comparing Apples with, err, Apples.

Compare the G4 1.4GHz mac mini with the Core Solo 1.5GHz machine and you'll notice that there isn't much of a difference in performance.

Re:Dual-Core Oranges

[ischorr]

Where did you get this from? If you go to Apple's own marketing site for the Mac Mini (http://www.apple.com/macmini/) you can see that they're quite clearly making their performance claims versus the 1.42Ghz G4. Based on their "specs", the raw computing speedup is at *least* 2x.

Re:Dual-Core Oranges

[mink]

In "some" aplications, not across the board.

simple, cheap, fun and...

[MonoSynth]

...silent.

Re:simple, cheap, fun and...

[Anonymous Coward]

...silent.

like i like my women.

sweet!

[gladbach]

mario party 8 will be incredibly innovative!

Re:sweet!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post was incredibly irrelevant!

Re:sweet!

[bigman2003]

You're right on target there. "Nintendo is all about innovation."

Bullshit.

Nintendo is just a *little* different. Not a big deal. And they just keep recycling all of the same stuff. Yes, it is different from other people, but it is the same crap they've been selling for years.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[cduffy]

We don't have flying cars but we do have this. In color, high definition and in multichannel theater sound. Interactive and affordable. $1700 at Walmart.

Not everyone -- or even everyone in middle-class America -- can afford to spend $1700 on a piece of equipment targeted strictly at entertainment.

If I had $1700, I could pay off some of my wife's outstanding medical bills. Hire someone to bring the ventilation of my bathrooms up to code. Fix the doors to my garage. Pay down the line of credit I used to pay my self-employment taxes on a few years ago. Buy a little more equity in my house. Start setting up a buffer to live off of if something happens to my job. Each and every one of these things is easier for me to justify than buying a new television.

Now, granted, my employer is a startup, and so the cash component of my pay isn't what it would be elsewhere -- but even if I were making $25,000 more than I am right now, I'd still have a huge laundry list of More Worthwhile Things which would take a year or two to pay off, by which time there'd probably be still more of them.

Spending $100-200 on a piece of entertainment equipment which will see extended use (like a low-end console)? Justifyable, so long as other entertainment expenses are kept to a minimum. A $500 console which requires a $1700 television to fully take advantage of it? Not whatsoever.

My point? The Revolution has a market, one that the higher-end next-gen consoles are foresaking.

Why Nintendo rules

[Josh teh Jenius]

It's too early to look at these trolls ranting against my beloved Nintendo. Remember:

• Are you a bad enough dude to save the President?
• It's a secret to everybody
• One word: Faxanadu (music *still* stuck in my head)

NES/SNES graphics may look like a PS/2 286 these days, but IMO they were the MOST FUN of any games ever made (except maybe the old Sierra stuff in the 80's).

I will never spend more than a few hundred dollars for an HDTV. Why? Because unless I am wearing my glasses (which I almost never do) I can't see any difference anyway. So, yeah, I guess I could wear uncomfortable glasses or contacts, and spend more on a TV than I did on my first car...but it seems like an awful lot of work just to be able to count the moles on some actresses chin.

Don't forget...Mario became "Mario" because they lacked the space to define a mouth and used a mustache. Sometimes an apparent limitation becomes a company's strongest asset.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Alistar]

Actually they do ... well almost.

I can go down to best buy here in Canada and buy a 26" widescreen or even letterbox HDTV (1080i even).
This was about a month ago, and they weren't exactly common, but there were quite a few CRT HDTV ranging from that 26" to 36".

Don't Copy That Floppy!

[wed128]

Relevant link:
http://netilium.org/~mad/dctf/

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[ianscot]

I think Nintendo has badly underestimated what HD brings to the market.

And as someone who's actually in a position to buy one of these systems for my 12-year-olds, I think Sony and MS have badly overestimated the share of the population that is desperate to shell out upwards of two grand to play video games which cost another $60+ a pop. The cost of the HDTV monitor becomes part of the cost of playing for their already shockingly priced systems. Otherwise I don't see the benefits of their gaudy specs, do I?

Let's see, I can pay $200-$300 for a console and then the bump for the individual games, and have something that's trying to be a little different and that's about game play, or I can pony up $2000 -- nearly an order of magnitude higher -- to get a wide screen LCD TV and the other console, on which I will see Shaq sweat but still not be able to realistically rebound with him after umpty-lumpty yearly updates to NBA Live. Which one do I want? The picture's pretty and all, I grant you. It won't do near as much to make things fun as the Rev controller if it works out...

I'm a big movie buff too -- Netflix subscriber, University Film Society goer, that kind of thing -- and the lure of an HDTV fell completely flat when I looked at what it would take to get working right. It's not just money, they're still a pain in the butt to fiddle around with. Sony and MS are asking me to bump things up another $500 notch in cost. To play games whose mechanics and basic M.O. haven't changed since, oh, Doom or so.

My money is literally going to Nintendo. It's an easy pick.

Yes, the big screen experience sells

[Anonymous Coward]

It is the big screen experience that sells.

I agree. My cellphone provider recently started trying to sell games for their phones. I think it's crazy. No one will want a game that can only be played on a screen that small. The graphics looked to be about as good as the regular Nintendo, if that. I guess they forgot it was 2006.

-Luke (now with more sarcasm!)

TV's and Geeks

[Anonymous Coward]

Please raise your hand if you're not a big fan of the general crud on TV and don't really watch much.

Raise your hand if you still have a SDTV (standard def) that is doing just fine thank you very much.

Raise your hand if you are looking to piss away a couple of GRAND on a new TV?

Raise your hand if you're getting a PS3 / Xbox360 for the pretty graphics.... put your hand down.

Just my opninion but there are far better things to buy/invest in than a pretty HDTV set right now.

I'll be pre-ordering the Revolution on day 1 though, it actually looks like it could be fun!

Revolution Xbox

[rAiNsT0rm]

If any place should be able to understand the stupid comparisons to the Xbox and how little they mean it should be the /. crowd. The numbers across the board are *better* than the Xbox... and it seems that everyone forgets that the Xbox was NOT streamlined or specialized hardware at all. This is not a bastardized PC tossed together from the spare parts bin, it is a highly specialized dedicated piece of hardware that will easily outpace the Xbox all around.

The Gekko was hands down, the best graphics chip of the last round with 8 texture layers available for *each* poly on screen! It just went majorly unused due to other constraints. Those have been dealt with and addressed, and now the Revolution is able to harness the hardware properly and utilize it.

Comparing the Revolution to the Xbox is about the most useless comparison anyone could have made since they are as similar as cheese and a toothbrush. It is no secret that IGN is receiving MASSIVE dollars from Microsoft for placement and advertising, and not so from Nintendo... if this is how they plan on handling "reviews" and "news" I have officially stopped even glancing IGN's way. How about a in-depth analytical breakdown of these specs and what they really could mean? Nah, lets compare it to the Xbox, talk it down and call it a day.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like someone is trying to justify his recent DLP purchase in his mind. I'll wait for a while thank you very much. My recently purchased 32" SD Panasonic TAU CRT will last me many many years, and I'm quite happy with it. It cost me $450 vs the $900 it would have cost me for the HD version. Given the lack of signicant ammounts of HD content + the added cost / month for HD, it was a no brainer.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

"We don't have flying cars but we do have this. In color, high definition and in multichannel theater sound. Interactive and affordable. $1700 at Walmart."

That's three months worth of rent where I live. Affordable my ass.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[chemical_9]

Actually being able to see what's happening in your quarter of the screen in 4-player mode isn't a fundamental enhancement? IMHO, I love the idea of being able to clearly make out what the hell I'm shooting at. I guess some of you crazy types just love your 360x240 screens!

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[steveo777]

[firey church-goer stands up]Amen, amen amen. Preach it brother!(or sister)

I constantly want to spend money on a new wizz-bang TV, but then I realize there is a mortgage. There are student loans. I have to put tires on my car. The heating bill is astronimical and by next winter, it will be again (thinking ahead).

If I really want HD TV, I could probably just stream it to my monitor with a $200 HDTV card, which I may do, seeing as the only TV in my house has dials that clunk when you turn them. I simply don't watch television, but I love gaming.

Not counting the same thing

[Junta]

The Top500 benchmark is double precision floating point operations, 64 bit. The platforms boasting seemingly unbelievable teraflop figures are flaunting single-precision (32-bit) performance. Though still boasting Rpeak when only Rmax really counts (theoretical maximum versus acheivable performance), it isn't an outright lie, just not taken in the same context as Top500.

Hardware doesn't tell the tale

[{tele}machus_*1]

Frankly, while the 360 is capable of producing some beautiful graphics, excellent visuals don't make a game great. I think many here have said that in one way or another. If the Revolution is at a good price point, there is a good chance I will pick one up (probably in addition to a PS3), because the deciding factor for me is not graphics but how much money I can afford to spend on games.

Re:Hardware doesn't tell the tale

[pl1ght]

While i would tend to agree to an extent. Its going to be hard to even call the revolution passable in graphics. Again, beating a dead horse, but High Def support is important to me and many others. Graphics hardly anymore powerful than the last gen xbox? The innovative nature of this machine really needs to be something special to succeed. It definitely is aimed more for a childs toy, than a big boys console gaming system. I dont mean this as a troll or any other, but i believe its the truth and its ultimate downfall. Maybe they will prove me wrong, and i hope they do because that will definitely mean its something worth checking out.

Re:Hardware doesn't tell the tale

[deque_alpha]

...High Def support is important to me and many others.

I don't think this is actually true. I think that a lot of people think this is important to them, because the ads all say it's important. I know a lot of people who are really into movies and TV and such. Only two of them have hi-def capable equipment, and only one of them actually cares that it's HD capable. The other one just got it because "it's one of those neat new LCD TV's!". Even with the one who cares, HD is the exception rather than the rule, most of his time in front of it is still in SD. I'm really curious just how big the demand for HD really is among the general public. I'd wager it's a lot lower than the TV manufacturers would like, and a lot lower than it is amongst the segment of the population that read /.

Re:Hardware doesn't tell the tale

[stevencbrown]

I personally think the demand is similar to what demand will be for Blu-Ray - i.e. pretty small.

Companies can bang on about it being the latest and greatest thing, but to be honest these technologies just don't offer enough improvement to the average consumer. (certainly not as much as the often quoted comparison between video and DVD).

I love gadgets, and have a high disposable income, so if anyone was going to splash out for a HDTV, it would be me.

But to be honest, it just looks like spending money for the sake of it. And if I think that, I find it that unlikely that the average punter will be queueing up to waste a load of money on it.

Good call by nintendo on this, IMHO.

Ten?

[Expert Determination]

Eleven!

What are you smoking?

[cybrthng]

Ghost Recon? Oblivion? Kameo?

I'm not sure about the life you live but i sure as hell don't get to drive tanks, fight funny creatures and morph into different characters and go on epic journeys in lush forrests and such.

Re:What are you smoking?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ghost Recon is uncomfortably close to the footage coming out of Iraq. I don't want to think about that stuff, it is not fun, it's grotesque. Real people are dying.

Kameo, fair enough.

Re:What are you smoking?

[LupusCanis]

Shame that only one of those games is notable in any way :P

You need to rethink hardware corporation methods

[Zigmar]

I'm sorry,you are completely wrong. Those number (clock speed) can't be compared _at_all_ on processors with different architectures. For example one CPU can perform only one simple operation during the CPU cycle and need to fetch each instruction from RAM, while other may perform dozen operations of different pipes and stages, take instruction from light-speed fast cache and predict most of the branches. That's just example, but it not far from the truth. CPU clock speed all alone can tell you _nothing_ about performance of the system. Even if you take into account the architecture, clock speed, RAM speed, main board and buses architecture, etc. you can tell nothing, because in order to compare, you have to run real benchmarks, because some architectures outperform others easily on some tasks, and lose on others.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no reason for a small TV to be HD, you won't gain much as the picture is small enough and from a reasonable distance the pixels will not be noticeable. The only reason you really need HD is for a large screen. If you kept the standard resolution you would see huge pixels on a 50" screen. And for now, that is where the profit is.

You will still be able to keep your standard TV after the changeover, you will just have to have a digital tuner or Cable/Satellite. You don't have to have an HDTV.

You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[cybrthng]

The 360 is designed for the whole experience. Dolby Digital Sound, High Definition Picture and online integration and capabilities that are second to none.

You define nintendo by not behing HD, we define the 360 by being HD. You can't tell me that the experience the xbox 360 generates isn't a "gaming revolution"

I'm sorry, but i invested in great High def video for my pc, my movies and yes now my console and i won't ever look back since the overall experience is mindblowing when you go back and think of how quickly we got to where we are today.

Push the limits

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[dpilot]

You're not the target market for the Revolution.
You are the target market for the XBox 360/PS3.

I suspect Nintendo knows their target market well, and more likely their next generation will be HD, but for this generation the extra cost of HD is a liability.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[russ_allegro]

Hope that they do know the market well. Hopfully not just like how 3fx knew their market well by not supporting 32 bit 3d acceleration, and how nintendo knew their market well in the past with the virtual boy.

The virual boy was pretty darn cool though and I owned the latest 3dfx cards there just wasn't enough me's apparently.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[Soul-Burn666]

Did you know that just as all other Nintendo consoles, the Virtual Boy was financially profitable?
Moreover, just about anyone I heard that had one really loved it.
So please stop the hatin'!

Nintendo also didn't plan online networking for the GC and were kinda left out. They then saw it was successful and added it to the DS and the Revo.

If HD turns out to be worth it, which it probably will, Nintendo will add it to their new console. At that time, the price point will be much lower and they will still make profit!

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[russ_allegro]

Even if the virtual boy was profitable for nintendo it was a bummer for everyone that bought one. Even though it was pretty cool, paying over $150 for a virtual boy to only have mainly the initial release titles kinda stinks. You expect when buying a console to usually have many new games in the coming years.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[andrewrm]

I have a HD set and all the necessary goodies to make the 360 go to the limit (but not at 1080i). Will I buy it? No way. I have a full time job and a social life with real live human beings that don't have controllers glued to their hands. I want a gaming experience that doesn't require a novel length instruction manual and memorizing 50 button sequences to make it to even the opening level. The uptick in quality isn't worth it if I can't learn and enjoy the game within the limits of my available time. The current crop of 360 games look like rehashed splatter button mashers. Not every gamer is 13 with huge amounts of free time. The price of entry to play is too high for the amount of time I have available. The Revolution should fit the bill nicely particularly at the $199.00 price point combined with the huge amount of games available on line. I think Nintendo has created a new market segment with their usual creative thinking. Will they outsell Sony or Microsoft? Probably not but I think a lot of hard core gamers will have it as a second unit.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[cybrthng]

I have a HD set and all the necessary goodies to make the 360 go to the limit (but not at 1080i). Will I buy it? No way. I have a full time job and a social life with real live human beings that don't have controllers glued to their hands.

Not having a personal life is a personal issue. Has nothing to do with owning a Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft Console. Thats a pretty weak statement.

I want a gaming experience that doesn't require a novel length instruction manual and memorizing 50 button sequences to make it to even the opening level. The uptick in quality isn't worth it if I can't learn and enjoy the game within the limits of my available time. The current crop of 360 games look like rehashed splatter button mashers.

You just contradict yourself again. You don't want to learn the game and then you accuse them of being button mashers, come on, choose your pill buddy. I have 4 360 games and none of them are button mashers. FNR3 requires some skill, kameo requires thought process in solving how to get in and out of situations, project gotham requires memorization and patience and a thoughtfull understanding of cars/racing and physics and ghost recond requires a bit of intelligence, planning, patience and style. None of them are button mashers, all are enhanced through HD and Dolby Digital and great gameplay online and offline.

Not every gamer is 13 with huge amounts of free time. The price of entry to play is too high for the amount of time I have available. The Revolution should fit the bill nicely particularly at the $199.00 price point combined with the huge amount of games available on line. I think Nintendo has created a new market segment with their usual creative thinking. Will they outsell Sony or Microsoft? Probably not but I think a lot of hard core gamers will have it as a second unit.

I'm pushing 30, have kids and don't have time to game. that is the beauty of the console market in general. I am however an HD nut, movie fan and home theater builder and i appreciate how Microsoft has taken that market and delivered a product that meets and exceeds my expectations on a daily basis. If you don't think the 360 is creative, your not thinking. I'm not sure if you noticed but the 360 already has tons of online games (Xbox live arcade) tons of offline games (80 by summer) and demos of games hitting the stores to boot in order to "try before you buy" Not only do they have these games but they're enhanced for the online experience, from shared scores to leader boards to downloads, online competitions and more. mind you what nintendo is doing is brive, but don't be blind to what gamers want. Your not a "real" gamer just because your a fanboy. Your a real gamer when you can appreciate and value the time and experiences you get from gaming and the 360 has delivered that hands down top notch experience i haven't felt since the genesis days.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks great, yup, but since there aren't many fun games for it, it seems like a waste.

Re:You miss the point of the 360 entirely...

[andrewrm]

Alright. I didn't clarify myself. The proplem I have with most "cutting edge" games is that they require a comparitively huge amount of dedication to learn even a button masher feels like it has too many variables and time committement for basic play. The 360 is a fantastic piece of technology but by the very complexity and cost of entry to get involved in the experience it is going to at the very begining at least only appeal to the serious fans that commit the time and effort to get the resulting gaming exerience. The xbox is marketed towards that kind of player pure and simple. That is the hard core player! Despite what you may think I am a gamer. I have been for well over twenty years now but not the kind of player that Xbox is marketed towards. I play some kind of game every day one some kid of equipment be it console, p.c. or even my phone. I'm not a Nintendo fan boy. I have owned an N64 but have also owned systems by Atari, Coleco and Sony and p.c.s all the way back to my Commodore 64. I stand by my statement that Nintendo has a good concept in going after a broader less hard core audiance that still wants to play.

Slashdot: Digg articles a day or two late

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Slashdot should get a new byline.

Re:Slashdot: Digg articles a day or two late

[miscz]

Slashdot: Digg withouth articles like "Great applet for choosing colour themes" or "Apple rocks" with content of "The title says it all!!!11oneoneone"

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[iainl]

I don't know about you, but I sit a hell of a lot closer to my 17" PC monitor than I do to my 32" widescreen TV. Sure, the PC monitor is smaller, but it fills a lot more of my vision, and so the resolution is more noticeable. Also, I use it for staring at black text on a white background, which shows up individual pixels an awful lot more than a moving, photo-based TV picture does.

So it isn't obviously false at all.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[jonnythan]

WTF are you talking about?

Watch a 50" 1080p display, then watch your freaking computer monitor, and tell me which one gives a better experience.

Give me a break.

Re:You need to rethink hardware corporation method

[lysergic.acid]

Your reading comprehension skills aren't very good. CPU clock speeds themselves may not be enough to make precise judgements about performance, but knowing that the CPUs were designed by the same group of industry leaders, for the same applications on the same generation of consoles, likely using comparable technology, in addition to the huge disparity in available memory as well as clock speeds should allow one to get an idea of where the console stands compared to the other machines. No one is claiming that the output margins are huge, but you're kidding yourself if you think the revolution is going to out-perform the 360 hardware-wise when every piece of evidence points to the fact that nintendo isn't focusing on hardware superiority to compete with the other consoles. Clock rate might not tell the full-story, but given the circumstances, they offer one a vague idea of what to expect.

Look, nintendo makes good consoles and good games, they just don't always push for the most blistering fast machines that can pump out the most polygons or highest pixel resolution--that is the point the author was making.

Unreal how conventional you really are

[ianscot]

There are lots of classes of games for which graphics are important.

"Important" maybe, but almost never the difference maker for me. The only way they'll be that now is if a prospective HDTV looks sucky without the MS or Sony system. I am not likely to be spending two grand to buy an HDTV and a Microsoft product...

Take for example sports games which are very popular in the US. Graphics are critical for such games to reproduce the realism of a real sports event.

there isn't a whole lot of room to innovate in the gameplay department,

I play mostly sports games (my two 12-year-olds being the main game consumers in the household), and you are completely wrong at least for me. While it's nice that Shaq sweats realistically in the new 360 version, the fact that NBALive hasn't fixed game pacing (170 to 148! I win!) or the rebounding mechanics in countless revisions of the title matters far, far more than any graphics engine. The system for locking into a player over the course of a game matters more than another incremental improvement in image. By far.

Sports titles have added enormous franchise modes to their games over the last, oh, eight years or so, and the thoroughness of those modes is what gets me to buy a new copy sometimes. It's not the graphics, ever. For lots of people it's the updated rosters, pure and simple; if a game franchise made those ratings better or different and more complete, it'd be a big competitive edge.

Also consider the genre of first-person shooters

In which you again seem completely hemmed in by your past experience. Ever considered the implications of the whacky controller for those? Given how big the advantage of mouse play is for PC FPS players? Given how sucky traditional console controllers are for them? You think more lighting effects are going to make as big a difference as being able to swing a sword or whatever?

what would LOTR be without the sweeping views of the New Zealand countryside, or the huge, detailed shots of giant armies?

The idea that RPGs can't achieve an "epic" feel without the extra horsepower is silly. (And Peter Jackson would have done better to include less fields of screaming CGI orcs and a tighter script.) Check out the list of the best RPGs, or just the best games, of all time: graphics are not the edge for any of them, and in many cases they were comparatively primitive graphically even for the time. Ultima III, Ocarina of Time, the Civ series... Not a list about graphical horsepower. All "epic."

It seems very clear to me that the Revolution is destined to be another Gamecube

Again you think the future will be just like the past. The Gamecube was Nintendo's attempt to compete on the other guys' terms. The new one is quite different because of that (moneymaking) relative failure on their part.

in that case, Nintendo isn't really competing in the same sphere as Microsoft and Sony.

We agree!

Re:Unreal how conventional you really are

[TrancePhreak]

Every Ultima game was considered ground breaking in the graphics department when it was released. Even 9, which had its flaws, was considered ahead of its time.

I'm not as sure about Ocarina Of Time, but it does seem pretty good for when it came out.

Re:Unreal how conventional you really are

[be-fan]

Check out the list of the best RPGs, or just the best games, of all time: graphics are not the edge for any of them, and in many cases they were comparatively primitive graphically even for the time. Ultima III, Ocarina of Time, the Civ series... Not a list about graphical horsepower. All "epic."

Except Ultima III, none of the games you mention are console RPGs. Console RPGs are things like Final Fantasy, the DragonQuest series, Chrono Trigger, etc. Most of the good RPGs I've played were quite graphically competent for their time period. Chrono Trigger looks dated today, but back when it came out, it looked very good. The Final Fantasy games have always been fairly close to the edge in terms of graphics. An important thing to remember is that graphics doesn't just determine how users will perceive the game, but it will determine what games get made. the PS3 is likely to remain the #1 system for RPGs, simply because it allows developers the most freedom to create a graphically rich and engrossing RPG. The Revolution's hardware specs may very well cause a repeat of the N64-disaster. Top RPG makers stayed of the N64, because its cart-format was much more limiting for the resulting game than the CD format of the PSX.

Re:Unreal how conventional you really are

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a large number of RPG developers speaking about how good the Revolution control will be for RPGs. The real question is whether or not the consumer will be happy with the control schemes they provide, or if they'll desire something more traditional.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[whoop]

Sure, HDTVs are ONLY $1700 or so. That is exactly the difference between MS/Sony's market and Nintendo's. People who spend $1700 on a tv and $4-600 on a video game machine are the type of people who are either very heavy gamers, spending 4 or more hours a day at it, or they are ones who equate quality with dollars. They have their systems prominently displayed in the living room and brag about their setups with their friends (if any). These are exactly the ones Nintendo does NOT target.

Nintendo believes there is plenty more money in the kids, casual gamers, less hardcore types. A $200 system and a $80 19" tv can be dropped into the kids' room without a bother of how they'll end up spilling soda on it and need it replaced within the year. Besides, after spending $300 on this complete setup, guess how much money is left over to buy a few $40-50 games? So, you have $500 for hundreds of hours of fun playing, vs $500 for just a fancy box of hardware buzzwords.

I haven't played much in consoles since the SNES days, really. But I recently picked up a DS and I'm back in the groove. I'll likely be coming down with a couple days of "the flu" on Revolution release day.

Re:Ugh, this bullshit again. DISCLAIMER for P

[Anonymous Coward]

I probably should have pointed out that the post was completely serious and definitely not intended to be a troll/flamebait.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Zangief]

That is why I said 'sometimes'.

Hurry up and release it already!!!

[JackAxe]

I grow impatient waiting, because this thing looks like it will be loads of fun.

<]=)

Re:GC controller good but not revolutionary

[Psykechan]

I like the GC controller. I find it having two major flaws and a few minor ones but it is the most comfortable of the current generation console controllers IMHO.

Really though, there isn't much innovation with the design. The analog sticks are the most sensitive (as pointed out by the Super Monkey Ball series) but this would be evolutionary and not revolutionary. What else? The C stick (second analog stick) doesn't have a lip on it. OK, fine. There is one thing that is interesting in the design; the L and R buttons are analog.

Now I would hardly call analog shoulder buttons revolutionary since the PS2 technically had them, the Dreamcast came standard with them and the Saturn had them as an add-on in 1996 but what made them unique on the GC was that they were not triggers (DC, Sat) or odd pressure sensitive buttons (PS2) but were in fact sliders which also each had a digital button. I suppose that this is revolutionary.

Granted that most games did not take advantage of this very well or they tried to treat the shoulder sliders the same as the shoulder buttons on other consoles. Take Prince of Persia for example; they ignored the sliders and used the digital buttons for actions forcing players to tire out their index fingers fighting the springs while they could have used a system similar to the Xbox's shoulder buttons where once a certain analog threshold was met then the action took place. Clearly there was little playtesting there.

Speaking of insufficient playtesting, one of the GC controller's major flaws was the addition of the Z button. This was clearly slapped on at the last moment after the L/R sliders were already complete. The lip on the R slider, which was designed for exclusive use by the right index finger, prevented quick movement over to the Z button. If the Z button had been placed lower on the controller for use with the middle finger or ring finger then this would not have been such an issue. Yes, the reason that it wasn't was because Nintendo had many problems with casual gamers wondering where the Z button was on the N64 controller and didn't want to have it "hidden". Sadly, this caused the near worthlessness of the Z button.

Just because the Z button was annoying to use didn't mean that developers, especially first party developers, wouldn't force its use whenever possible. Super Smash Bros. Melee used it as the sole button for dropping items despite the fact that "shield" could be performed by both L and R and "jump" could be performed by X, Y, and up! If the Gamecube's controller was revolutionary, it was due to the fact that it was the first time that Nintendo took a step backwards with ergonomics.

On a side note, any poorly executed game could probably cause a player to curse a controller feature. Try playing Gunvalkyrie on the Xbox for a while and you will be convinced that clickable buttons on analog sticks are the worst idea ever.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

You just suck at video games and are making up excuses for said suckage.

500 bucks

[CritterNYC]

The low-end tube HDTVs are now around 500 bucks (US). They won't have an HD tuner built-in... but for most people, that isn't an issue (if you have cable/satellite as most people interested in an HD will, the new HD cable/satellite box you get has everything you need).

Explanation

[Anonymous Coward]

"I would never consider buying myself a $400+ gaming system, simply will not happen. If the new Nintendo were to cost $1,000 and if all of his friends were going to get one, I wouldn't hesitate to pre-order today.

Wait, wah? Stop contradicting yourself."

He didn't contradict himself. You didn't pay enough attention to his pronouns.

He would never consider buying a gaming system that cost more than $400 for himself. He cannot justify it as a discretionary purchase for an adult.

If his *son* wanted $1,000 Nintendo, he would buy one for his son without hesitation.

The point is that his son's preferences, and the preferences of his son's friends, determine which console his household will own.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Headcase88]

Yeah, well, Nintendo owns the Mario franchise.

That being said, I always look forward to renting (maybe buying) each year's Mario Party. I'm not the same with any other annual game (well except DDR and In The Groove).

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Headcase88]

The atmosphere was awesome, the story was awesome, the sanity tricks were awesome, and the gameplay was boring.

Still liked it though.

Come on people...

[nmaster64]

I really wish you'd make it more clear this is a 100% rumor. Developers are working with non-final dev kits right now, so nobody's sure of the true final specs. I don't expect them to be amazing by any stretch of the imagination, but I think this "leak" is bull.

PSProblems

[metamatic]

It also doesn't help that it's very difficult to find a PSP you can actually try out, and that when you finally do find one the first thing you notice is the horrible load times.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[kuzb]

DS and Revolution do this. HD does not.

Actually, you don't know what the Revolution is going to do yet. We actually do have a gamecube here, and all it does is sit on a shelf with monkeyball in it. Occasionally it does get turned on, and we do have a good time with it. On the other hand, sitting beside it is an XBox 360 (Yes, I have a 57" HD TV and yes it makes a huge difference. Anyone who says otherwise has never used one.) which has seen more action in the last month than the Gamecube has seen all year. If you want to count the regular XBox, well, then the Xboxes combined have seen more action that the gamecube ever did. Granted, I'll probably get a revolution too when it comes out, assuming it has titles that interest (ex: non-mario-and-firends) me. I'm hoping that Nintendo will examine the Gamecube's failure and learn from it. The Revolution has a lot to do in order to earn it's name

Don't forget, an Xbox2 needs more cpu due to DRM!

[MrJerryNormandinSir]

Nintendo Rules. No DRM means that the platform will be plenty fast enough! The xbox2 needs all the cpu it can get
because of all the DRM crap!

Grr

[metamatic]

That explains why my damn GameCube won't do progressive scan even with the cable. Fscking Nintendo...

Re:Grr

[mink]

Nintendo has offered to exchange consoles with one that supports that feature last time I checked their website. I find it strange that if you have been having that problem you didn't go looking for support. It's been a while, but they removed the port completely on the new production models,as I remember, so how could you have the proper cable plugged in and it not have the port in question. If you do have an older one with the port then either the game you are trying to play does not support progressive scan, you have failed to activate it in some way or it is broken.

So why not go do something about your problem instead of cussing out someone? You are not related to that guy from Oklahoma are you?

Re:Grr

[metamatic]

I have the port, I have a cable. I activate the progressive scan feature, and all the color disappears from the image.

The thing is, given the relatively small number of games I play on the GameCube vs the PS2, I'm not inclined to buy another cable to try--specifically not given the outrageous price of the discontinued official Nintendo cable on eBay.

Combined with the lack of support for widescreen, I find that when a game is available for both PS2 and GameCube, I'm usually better off buying the PS2 version. So Nintendo are losing sales.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Anonymous Coward]

I am definentally hoping

We have a new winner.

Re:Revolution Xbox

[steveo777]

It is no secret that IGN is receiving MASSIVE dollars from Microsoft for placement and advertising, and not so from Nintendo

I'm not sure about that, but if you read any of the authour's other 'works' you will notice that he really is full of it. I can't link to other articles he wrote because I'm at work, but you should be able to link to his other stories. Generally he tries to use big words to bash Nintendo and doesn't EVER do real research. And judging by his usual comments, despite what he says, he hasn't likely even seen a Gamecube do it's thing.

1T SRAM

[Erich]

1T SRAM is just embedded DRAM.

So basically they have on-chip embedded DRAM, and external DRAM.

So... why do they have embedded DRAM (which isn't as good as DRAM in a process optimized for it) if the external is just as fast (according to TFA)?

Re:1T SRAM

[randyest]

1T SRAM is just embedded DRAM

That's not quite accurate. It's at least misleading.

1T-SRAM is really DRAM (it's dynamic, requiring refresh -- not static) but it's not the same as what people usually call eDRAM (embedded DRAM.) 1T-SRAM is a specific memory cell design developed and owned by MoSys. It uses a single transistor and a capacitor for each bit of storage. It's a very specific implementation.

eDRAM is a generic term for any embedded dynamic memory. This can be implemented as trench-style (IBM), MiM / Metal-insulator-metal type (NEC), or others. But it can't be "1T-SRAM" unless you're paying MoSys for it. Most DRAM is 4T or 6T.

Re:1T SRAM

[Erich]

Most SRAM is 4T or 6T. Most DRAM is a capacitor with a transistor for control of charge/discharge.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

I think what is being missed by you, and most people, is that there is a huge market for cheap consoles. The PSOne is a great example. It outsold the Gamecube after the PS2 was released. All that with no new innovations, no new games, etc. It was simply inexpensive, convenient, with a solid lineup of games on it. Sure, the PS2 outsold it by a factor of 5 that console cycle, but this cycle looks a little different. MS has an early lead, and will probably capture a much larger percentage of the market (though I still believe PS3 will come out on top by a significant margin). So there might be 40 million 360s and 50 million PS3s. With new games, new controllers, and the nostalgia factor of the entire Nintendo library going for it, the Revolution at the right price ($200) could easily double the PSOne's sales, which would put it in shooting distance of the other two, if still third place.
Consider the effects of emerging markets, such as China and India, where HDTV penetration will be non-existant for quite a long time, and Nintendo could even come out on top.

Finally, as to your last point, that HDTVs (I assume you are claiming 1080i?) might actually be in the majority by the Revolution's end of life. I'll concede this(it is by no means certain), but only to make the point that Nintendo could, at that moment, perform a similar console upgrade, putting the Revolution 2 ahead of the PS3 and 360, but well behind the PS4 and XBox 360++. That kind of horsepower, while still last in the race, would be perfectly sufficient to rock 1080i, if not 1080p.

Re:Innovative?

[pembo13]

The dreamcast looked a lot like an N64 controller to me.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[mrchaotica]

But if you look at the selection of games for nintendo, you'll see for yourself that an old 'wow' and 'hl2' fans don't really have much to play.

And how is that different from any other console, seeing as how WoW and HL2 are PC games?

Retarded

[mesmartyoudumb]

I stopped reading at this point.. I'm sure I don't need to explain it to you guys. :)

"The original Xbox's CPU, admittedly a different architecture altogether, was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

Nintendo's Revolution console, as seen on-display at the Game Developers Conference 2006
Clearly, numbers don't mean everything, but on paper Revolution's CPU falls performance-wise somewhere well beyond GameCube and just shy of the original Xbox"

Re:Retarded

[SScorpio]

Nintendo's Revolution console, as seen on-display at the Game Developers Conference 2006 Clearly, numbers don't mean everything, but on paper Revolution's CPU falls performance-wise somewhere well beyond GameCube and just shy of the original Xbox"

Which should be interesting to see what happens. In the end the Gamecube ran neck and neck with the Xbox performance-wise limited only in lower bitrate movies and music due to the 1.5GB disks vs. the 9GB disks. With the revolution being twice as powerful as the Gamecube, could it be the promised twice as powerful as the Xbox we've been waiting for?

The other thing that sticks in my mind is a post mordem from Factor 5 on Rogue Leader. They coded the game for the Gamecube's specs with how many polygons and such it could output, and it ran perfectly fine and they were even able to increase some of the graphical effects. We'll see what happens with the Revolution.

Re:Retarded

[DaveCBio]

I disagree that the GC ran neck and neck with the Xbox. There may have been similarities in ported games, but that's the lowest common denominator showing. Compare the visuals in the Splinter Cell games across platforms and you'll see that the Xbox came out on top. Not saying the Cube was a slouch, just that the Xbox had the superior hardware last gen. If devs actually used the power is the question.

Re:Retarded

[Anonymous Coward]

The Splinter Cell games are the single worst basis of comparison you can use to compare the Xbox and Gamecube. Microsoft paid for the development of the Xbox version so that Ubisoft would tweak it to perfection. Meanwhile, Ubisoft had a much less skilled studio port the PS2 version to the Gamecube on the cheap, which is why the resulting mess actually ran worse on the Gamecube.

To see what the Gamecube can actually do, look at the games developed specifically for it, Resident Evil 4 and the Rogue Squadron games in particular.

Re:Retarded

[DaveCBio]

Have you got proof of these statements or is this just "Internet Theory" (tm)? I have never seen anything that said MS paid Ubi to tweak Splinter Cell.

Re:Retarded

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh, the MS paying bit might just be "Internet Theory," but that's beside the point. Ubisoft's Shanghai studio developed both the PS2 and Gamecube versions. Check the credits for proof of that. If that's not good enough, here's an interview that, aside from the usual preview BS, shows that Shanghai worked on those versions, with the PS2 version having a three month lead on the GC version.

As for porting, a side by side comparison of all versions immediately shows that the level designs are identical between the PS2 and Gamecube versions and between the Xbox and PC versions. It took a while, but I finally found the comparison screenshots that prove this: 1,2,3,4,5. The second and fifth ones make it especially obvious that the PS2 and GC versions are the same game, and different from the PC and Xbox versions.

Once again, if you look at the graphics in games designed to take advantage of the Gamecube hardware, it's pretty clear that Splinter Cell and its sequels could look much better than they do. They don't because Ubisoft went cheap on the Gamecube.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[pjp6259]

You can find relatively small HDTVs. About 6 months ago I was thinking of purchasing a 27" TV, and the HD versions blew away the SDTVs. Even on a NTSC signal, the HDTVs just looked sharper, better color, etc. IIRC, the price was around $500. I just looked on circuit city's website, and they had HDTVs as small as 19" (although it looked like they were all LCD not CRT).

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

Hear hear. Aside from the DRM implications, HDTV is just too expensive.

I've never been one to cheap out on electronics. My last 2 TVs were a General Electric in 1992 and a Panasonic in 2002, both 20" boxes retailing over $200 while everyone and their brother flocked to Walmart's $99 Sorny/Magnetbox/Panaphonics. If the GE (Canadian built believe it or not) hadn't been damaged in college or the repairmen competent (yeah, you want $300 but you can't guarantee you can fix the probably very isolated problem, right), I'd probably still have it and I wish I'd had the funds if not foresight to buy more of the Panasonic model.

I've been wanting to get a widescreen TV since back when they weren't LCDs - back in the days of letterbox VHS even. Sure, the price has come down some but I only just saw my first name brand 40" under $2000 a couple weeks ago. That's insane and I suspect it was more a "hurry up and get rid of these before the sheeple realize they're not HDCP compliant!" sentiment at work. Even then, from what I've heard about Sony and others, a name brand doesn't mean the quality's anything above rebadged slipshod construction.

HDTV adoption was low, because what's being offered as HDTV today is not what I wanted in the early 1990s when all the hoopla started. I wanted a simple CRT, that worked with all my existing equipment, but a clearly defined resolution somewhere approaching 10x what I had. Instead, we're getting cheaply made LCDs that must be viewed head on, don't show blacks well, have pixelization, exhibit ghosting/blur, don't accept most of the old equipment's inputs, haven't adopted a single standard resolution, are stuffed to the gills with DRM and cost 10 times as much. Oh, and adding insult to injury, somebody also decided everyone wants shiny silver cases now, screwing anybody with pre-2002 electronics (which were predominatly black).

Note: Regarding the resolution - if any of you don't see the start of a perpetual forced upgrade every 5-10 years here on in, all I can say is I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

If any of the new technology (HDTV/BluRay/etc) is adopted quicker, it'll be because milliosn of morons who don't know any better allowed the corporations to then force the rest of us by limiting our choices in the marketplace. I know what I'll be doing and it doesn't involve giving _them_ any money after the end of this year, that's for damned sure.

GT4 on the PS2 was 1080i

[ad0gg]

GT4 had 1080i output on the PS2.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[toph42]

I'm hoping that Nintendo will examine the Gamecube's failure and learn from it.

Failure? They made millions in profits from the GC. It was the most financially successful console of its generation. I doubt that Nintendo shareholders consider it a failure.

Re:They'll get a significant portion of the market

[Senzei]

Ah, but Nintendo is missing out on Burnout 3+, which is about as fun as Mario Kart.

Awesome, so we are just now catching up to the fun level of games from ten years ago. Its Lisp all over again.

The relative success of each console

[angrymilkman]

I wonder what the relevant success of each console is if one looks at how much these consoles are being pirated. I know its relatively easy to hack the xbox and play games for free. With the Ps2 it is much more difficult and with the gamecube very very hard. So Nintendo loses much less money on titles due to piracy then for example Microsoft.

Re:The relative success of each console

[Anonymous Coward]

are you kidding? you require only an action replay max evo to play pirated games on the cube.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[jchenx]

I will kill your argument with only one proposition : You start paying the novelty tax, I'll root for you and call you the coolest kid on the block, and I'll buy a HDTV when it's dirt cheap.

Actually, I was extremely lucky to get my HDTV as a gift (a very expensive one at that), although I was about to purchase one anyway. :)

Anyway, I think we're both right. I'm not saying that HDTV adoption is going to be huge in the short term. But the cost is going down, so a few years down the line, you CAN buy a decent HDTV for dirt cheap (as you said). I guess what I'm trying to say is that HDTV is not some fad that's going to come and go. Nor is it something that's going to take 20 years to adopt. I give it 5-10 years when a majority of the population now has HDTV in some form. Didn't somebody say it's already 10% now? (Which actually seems high to me)

We geeks are tech-savvy, not drug addicts. HDTV can wait.

I don't know about that. I know plenty of geeks that will drop a grand to upgrade their system with the latest video card, or to buy the newest game console, or to get a shiny 21" LCD screen for their computer, or to get a new laptop, or a new PDA, etc., etc., etc. Most geeks I know that are tech-savvy also make decent money, so they CAN afford it.

I think the reason why most Slashdot geeks are hesitant to HDTV is because we stereotypically don't watch much TV. It's mostly filth, I agree. But I have a wife and thanks to her, I've gotten hooked to shows like Lost and Desperate Housewives (which are surprisingly good). But yeah, most of my other geek friends don't watch that much TV (probably because they aren't married!). Rather, they'd only see a need for HDTV for gaming purposes.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[jchenx]

HDTV has what? Higher resolution period. Whoa, paint me impressed.

This is what I don't understand. The stereotypical computer geek will rave about his new huge LCD monitor, and how he can now tweak it to astronomical resolutions. At the same time, he has a high-end video card so that he can play Quake 4 at enormously high resolutions. 1024x768? Blegh, that's for n00bs. Crank it up higher! Digital is where it's at ... screw analog!

But when it comes to TV, you're fine with the content displayed on your SD screen? As I mentioned in another post, I think this is because the stereotypical computer geek doesn't watch much TV at all, nor sports. As for me, I have a wife so she's gotten me sucked into (some) TV shows again. And my college is a football powerhouse, so I love watching NFL and college football on my HDTV. That alone makes it all worth it.

If that isn't your liking then I can understand. But a geek dissing higher resolution doesn't make sense to me.

Bottom line: Nintendo wants more money

[SilentChris]

Preface: I buy all the systems, every generation. I have that kind of disposable income. People are going to post that it's moronic. I'm a gamer, this is my hobby, I love my hobby. Now that that's out of the way...

People are entirely missing the real issue. Sony and Microsoft can spin it however they like ("look at all the polys"), Nintendo can spin it however it likes ("we focus on games, not hardware"). The bottom line reason why Nintendo is going with cheaper hardware has nothing to do with gaming philosophies, it has to do with money.

In short: cheaper hardware costs less to manufacture, meaning they can get a bigger profit, faster, on the systems. Every other console is going to be in the "sell for less than it costs to manufacture" phase for much longer. Nintendo thinks they can start at $150-200 and instantly make cash back on this thing. They also save money by relying on emulated titles and spending less on new game creation.

Nintendo is a great gaming company. Their business side is less than stellar. People will argue "they have a lot of cash on hand", but that's just the point -- having cash on hand is the only thing they really focus on. They don't focus on the core business model of consoles, which is to drive market penetration numbers up so they can make more on license fees.

The Revolution model will continue the practice of having more cash on hand while potentially alienating 3rd-party developers (the cornerstone of the license fees model). For all this talk by developers that "the Revolution controller will revolutionize how we create games", it's largely irrelevant. The publishers are the ones that sign the checks, and a majority of them got seriously burned with the N64 and GameCube. Publishers also don't like to take risks.

The business model Nintendo follows (cash on hand, neglect market penetration) is fundamentally flawed. What Nintendo should do, and I know people don't like to hear this, is get out of the console market entirely, focus on the handhelds and publish games for the other consoles. Their strength is first-party titles, not how they handle hardware. If they let Sony and Microsoft duke it out, they can focus on their core competency of making great games.

I've had it with Nintendo (and Mario)

[Anonymous Coward]

Kids, WAKE UP. Nintendo will always be around and will always be profitable. However, it's glory days are over and will never come back if the company continues down this path. I know it's Slashdot and you think that the rest of the world is just like you but I've got a stunning revelation: you're in the minority. I'm 27 and have been a huge fan of Nintendo since the NES but had a video game console before that called the Atari 5200. So it wasn't my first, maybe's that's part of the issue. Either way, Nintendo is niche now and keeps pushing the same kiddie crap over and over. Great for kids and families, but not at the top of my list anymore.

I have tons of systems including the original NES, SNES, Genesis, Saturn, N64, GBA, Game Gear, DS, PS2, XBOX, Gamecube, XBOX 360, PC, etc.--I go where the games are that I want to play, I don't just stick to one system, etc. I buy on average 10 games a month and therefore have a gigantic library. I remember sticking with Nintendo through the N64 (I loved that system), through $70 games Zelda:TOOT (it was almost worth it)(I love how they're seen as the "budget" company now--yeah, right), cartridges when the rest of the universe went to discs.

The Gamecube was pathetic--as much as I love the relatively small amount of games that I have for it (which include all the Rogue games, Eternal Darkness, RE4--they come so close but still not enough), I've had it with this kiddie shit. Don't try to tell me it's this untrue image given to them by others or something--they do it themselves. Enough with Mario--gone are the days when adding Mario to a game makes it an instant seller. I bought Mario 64 because it was a fun game, not because it had fat-ass Mario in it. Mario didn't add anything to it, I actually wished we could've play Toad instead (SMB2 is still my fav on the NES); don't even get me started on Luigi's Mansion. Gone are the days when mascots made any sort of a difference. I love many of those Mario games but I'm tired of it. For crying out loud, the character's original design came from LIMITATIONS. And why doesn't his hair color match his mustache these days?--but I digress...

I love Nintendo, but I grew up. Nostalgia, my ass--I've been playing all of their old games on emulators since 1997 or so. For FREE, with a N64 controller connected via a USB port, with instant saves anywhere, 1 button screen grabs, demos and jap games that didn't come out over here, etc. And I collected every single one of those old games over dial-up back in the day--I bet you could get 1 file these days per system (SNES, NES, NEO-GEO) that has everything and would take you 5 minutes to download. Anyway, I haven't played ROMS in a long time, though. Why?--because I have awesome new games on new systems that are more engaging. It's a time/interest issue. Once in a while, I'll go back, but as you may or may not have noticed, video games are a bit of a "moment" medium. That is, they are spectacular when they are hot but maybe not as exciting or fun when you go back because of the constantly moving entertainment bar since they were released. Don't get me wrong, I love playing the classics, but I always, always, always get a hankering to play newer stuff before too long.

How can you honestly compare the experience of Super Mario 2 with playing GRAW on 360. GRAW is like being a real solider without the negative aspects of real life constraints. It's an interactive entertainment experience--and I can listen to MY own music at the same time I'm greasing Mexicans on my 5.1 surround sound set-up, in widescreen hi-def.

So for me, at least, gaming has become more than just a fun hobby or a way to pass the time--it's an experience. I want to be immersed in expansive worlds and experiences that I just can't get in real life--racing Ferrari's in PGR3, for example. Why do you think GTA3 was such an immense hit?--hint, it's not the fucking M rating, violence or missions. It's the experience, the freedom--you'll know what I'm talking about if you can remember

Re:Innovative?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excuse me, nintendo did not invent touch screen gaming. I've been playing touch screen games on my palm for nearly 10 years now. Furthermore, I've been using a dual monitor setup on my gaming computer for a year or two now. The NDS is not revolutionary at all.

Size doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

It's how you use it, that counts.

At least, what's what I hear....

My rule of thumb on console games

[theurge14]

If you have to save your progress on a memory card, it's too damn complicated and therefore not fun.

This is why after all the years people are still playing Pac Man and Tetris and not the multitudes of no-name GTA ripoffs or outdated EA Sports schlock.

I can explain

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because you're incredibly fucking stupid.

Do you understand now?

It can

[Anonymous Coward]

And why can't it output at least 480p? Even my Gamecube could output 480p.

So can my Dreamcast, and the Revolution. Nintendo said that a VGA box will be available.

Re:Exactly. Nintendo = console for NON "Gamers"

[Ahnteis]

I'm a "gamer" myself -- but I have my PC for slick graphics, turbo charged, networked mayhem and destruction.

However, when friends come over, or I visit my family, it's the Gamecube (currently) that EVERYONE wants to play.

Whether it's Mario Kart (the hardest game I bring out for non-gamers), Shrek Super Party (a lot of my friends prefer this to Mario Party ___), or the always-requested Donkey Konga -- the gamecube is what gets everyone playing. Even my dear Mother (who has managed to send me an email... once) plays.

There are a LOT more "non-gamers" then there are "gamers" in the world, and Nintendo is going for THAT market as well as a good portion of the "gamer" market. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[nleaf]

The person who buys that $1700 home theatre system at Wal Mart will either:

1) Be attracted to the "bigger, shinier" approach to gaming and spring for an Xbox 360 or PS3

2) Buy all three anyway. Why not? He's got $1700 to burn on a TV.

Nintendo has been very consistent on their position to the avoid getting in a power=quality pissing contest with the other two consoles, and full 1080i support is just that.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why can't they make 24" CRT HDTVs?"

Because they would probably call it a 24" computer monitor with integrated TV tuner and charge you $1,000 for it.

My parents don't want HDTV, I don't want HDTV, and my co-workers who wanted one abandoned the idea after we got one in the conference room and watched a football game on it.

Big deal, they said. It looks great, but sitting five, 10 feet away, it looks the same to them. None of us are big on video quality; none of us are ever going to spend $100 on a video cable. Many of them drunk enough while they watch that it doesn't matter what resolution the game's displayed in.

They all know how great things are supposed to look in HD. But my dad's library of hundreds of DVDs aren't going to look any better, and he's not getting rid of them any time soon. I don't have cable TV because there's rarely anything I want to watch, and only one broadcast station I can catch. Those co-workers were sold on the hype but were let down by the actual experience.

And - having a friend whose family was rich enough to buy an HDTV despite having nothing HD to watch on it - after seeing a 360 game on a 40" HDTV, I'm still not convinced that it's the end-all for video games. PGR3 and GRAW were pretty, but Metroid Prime and RE4 were prettier on my low-def CRT and underpowered GameCube, to me. Shadow of the Colossus on low-def PS2 was prettier to me than King Kong on HD. A month later, they got rid of the damn thing because of burn-in and got a HD projector instead (which is, admittedly, pretty damn cool).

Even ignoring the fact that I can't fit a 40" television in my apartment, or afford a 27" one, I've seen absolutely nothing to sell me on the expense of HD. The 360 and PS3 aren't going to do it, especially not when I can get more enjoyment out of a PC and monitor combo that costs less than half as much as a big-screen HDTV. HD movies aren't going to do it. HD sports aren't going to do it. What else is there?

What do Developers think???

[Anonymous Coward]

I think what no one is stating is:

What do the developers think of the Revolution compared to the other systems?

All of the systems are based on the PowerPC so porting is minimized (not eliminated but less than last generation).
So, that means that comparing the clock speed as a guide of performance is closer than last generation.

Now, the developers that relese their games for all systems, or at least try will most likely not like the Revolution because:

1) They will have to rework the game (that has lots of detail and uses lots of memory [because it was designed to work on the Xbox360 or PS3]) to run on the less powerful revolution.

2) Because they're unsure if porting it to the revolution will alow them to make their money back.

This was Really bad with the GC. There's lots of games that are 3rd party, but only came out for the PS2 and Xbox. For whatever reason it was, it doesn't really matter now. Because now the reasons are more pronounced. the Revolution controler is so different that developers will have to totally rewrite the game to use the controller. So not only are they now porting to the CPU and GPU, but also the controller and limited amount of ram and processing compaired to the other systems.

The developers are what makes a system good or bad, because they make the games. Nintendo was never really good at gitting 3rd party developers. Most of their games they made them self. Now their scaring off developers even more because it'll be harder to make the same game for all systems.

This will cause a divide in the developer community.

Revolution will get Nintendo's games and developers that are willing to make a game that's only on the revolution. But, not the games that are on the other systems.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a high definition TV, do you? Just moving from standard def on XBox to high def on XBox360 (which is really standard def stretched and upsampled) completely changed the nature of GTA: San Andreas for me.

A large, crisp, vivid screen is fundamentally more immersive. If you, and Nintendo, feel that HTDV doesn't enhance gameplay, you're both perfect examples of not seeing the forest for the trees.

I've been a fan of Nintendo for years; I bought a GameCube before I bought an XBox, and I still don't own any kind of Playstation. I LIVED Animal Crossing for more of my life than I'd care to admit (on both GameCube and DS). Thanks to N neglecting HDTV, I just might not care as much this next time around.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Hitto]

I feel I have to say this, I've got a little Karma to burn anyway.

But this is an important issue to me, let me be the first to say, fuck tv. No capitals. No hate. Just ignore this shitbox forever. You cannot imagine how many neurons die when you're exposed to this shit. Don't even start with it... It's getting closer to the traditional sci-fi anticipation movies like rollerball, or books like 1984. It's fucking depressing to see so much lost potential in there, truly.
So fuck tv. You'll only be healthier.

Beer Factor

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that the Revolution controller allows you to play with one hand and hold a beer in the other, simultaneously, is absolute proof that the Revolution is for adults and the XBox and PS3 for kiddies.

Grow the fuck up, Nintendo fans

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, I see we have the usual bullshit coments from Nintendo fangirls proclaiming how great the Revolution is going to be, simultaneously trying to dismiss other game consoles which will once again reveal theirs to be silly and childish.

Re:Revolution Xbox

[rAiNsT0rm]

I have done review work as well as freelance writing in the videogame industry, and I can 100% say for a fact that my statement about IGN is correct. In fact this topic was touched on just the other day here on /.: http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/29/ 1853255

It is unfortunate but sites like IGN that redesign the entire site around a particular product or company have been paid to do so. No one would pay a number of web dev's to ovehaul their site every week just to stay current or be trendy. They are pushing product. That in and of itself is borderline, the only time it becomes an issue with me personally is when the writting becomes tainted as a result. Stories begin to all slant one way... amazingly the same way as the money coming in.

It is no secret that Microsoft has been tossing big bucks at IGN and a number of other online/print outlets in return for favorable reviews and extra coverage.

Oh, and Matt Cassimassina is I believe the guy you are referring to and yes he is a grade A dick. I've had the "pleasure" of meeting him a couple times and I'd rank him right up there with Seanbaby... who I'd happily hunt for sport if given the chance.

Re:Nintendoh!

[Gilzors]

But they're not competing. In an interview, Shigeru Miyamoto said that he didn't see it as a competition between Nintendo and any of the other things.

Re:You need to rethink hardware corporation method

[Zigmar]

I can't argue with you on gaming consoles - I have a very weak knowledge at that topic. In fact I won't tell apart 360 from that new Nintendo's box. But I have some knowledge on CPU architectures, and I can tell you, that there nothing like "comparable technology" playing any significant role. The technology more or less is same, but even if you take a look at modern personal computer/server CPUs - there is nothing comparable. Having the same clock speed, processors can give benchmarks _several_times_ different one from another. Just to make my point more clear - you can't compare different platforms only by their CPU clock speed. Period. It will not give you any meaningful results, or something to draw any conclusions of. Well if those clock speeds, were different by order of magnitude, I would say you might use it as measure, because no architecture will give you such performance range, but you are talking about numbers that are almost equal! You shouldn't even be surprised if "slower" (in your terms) platform will outperform other.

Re:Innovative?

[ZackSchil]

I have a palm too, but those games use the touchscreen exactly how a computer uses a mouse. Not innovative. A greater variety of touchscreen uses and FUN games have come from the NDS is under 2 years than the over 10 years that Palm Pilots have been out. Plus, palm pilots are not gaming machines. As for your dual monitor setup, good for you, I never mentioned two screens as being revolutionary. I deliberately left it out of the list because it's a rather minor evolution that hasn't really shaped gameplay that much.

Deep Spec Diving... Re:Spec Point...

[eonlabs]

Cool, I didn't know any of that.
Mine was mostly hypothetical with regard to the actual allocation of the 3MBs on chip.
Do you have any links to patents or technical info regarding the allocation? I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be interested in it.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[Lehk228]

the $300 computer monitor gives a better "eperiance" because it does not come with violent sodomy.

Re:Holy sh*t someone let the Nintendo fanbois out!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't tell me you just tried to compare Sony's outright marketing lies to Nintendo's down-to-earth product announcements. Are you kidding me? Sony has always conjured up these ridiculous proclamations about how amazing their products are, but who knows how the hell the PS3 is going to perform until we actually see it? Meanwhile, when Nintendo finally reveals that they'll put something in their products, they always deliver. They've re-released old games on new systems before and there's not much stopping them from doing it again.

Re:Analog switchoff, bowl games, and bait and swit

[arose]

The stereotypical computer geek will rave about his new huge LCD monitor, and how he can now tweak it to astronomical resolutions. At the same time, he has a high-end video card so that he can play Quake 4 at enormously high resolutions. 1024x768? Blegh, that's for n00bs. Crank it up higher!

Sounds more like the stereotypical gamer/overclocker.

HP? Did someone say HORSEPOWER?

[RabidTrucker]

Here's some up-to-the-second information that's
FASTER THAN SLASHDOT AND A SPEEDING LOCOMOTIVE
http://www.renewamerica.us/bb/viewtopic.php?p=7853 0#78530

The links there includes links to OTHER PAGES TOO,
so you get even more bang for your surfing buck! It's it's
a NEVERENDING STORY's WHAT IT IS.

WTF. "Industry Leaders?"

[silverdirk]

There's three things to consider when trying to use megaherts as a performance measure.

• How many cycles does the average instruction take?
• How many cycles are lost due to incorrect branch prediction?
• How many cycles are lost while waiting for data from memory?

Probably some other things too, but those seem to be the real speed-killers. There is no "industry standard" solution. AMD chose a short pipeline, so instructions complete in fewer clock cycles. Intel chose a longer pipeline, so instructions eat more clock cycles. This is why my Athlon-2500XP is actually running at 1.8ghz, but performing slightly better than a P4-2.5ghz. Now, a lot of this performance is also based on cache memory speeds, main memory speeds, and branch prediction. When you go to one of the cheaper chip manufacturers, like Cyrix, they leave out some of the technology that accelerates the performance, in favor of lower cost and lower heat. Big elaborate branch predictors use lots of silicon and consume power. I've seen the inside of a gamecube. There's no processor fan. Same goes for the other consoles. These guys are going to be cutting corners and eliminating bits of standard chip design in favor of low heat output.

As my computer architecture prof. likes to say "The real problem is feeding the beast." If you can't deliver an instruction to the processor, it can compute your answer. In general, you can't ensure that the next instruction is always ready. If you miss your cache on a 1ghz processor, and need to wait 5ns for the next instruction to come from main memory, you just lost 5000hz worth of processing due to a stall. In desktop chips, they have tons of clever technology to help prevent cache misses. In mobile processors and game systems and handhelds, they have to peel some of this off to keep the heat consumption down.

I'll guarantee you that the StrongArm and X-Scale processors running at 600Mhz don't compare to the old desktop models, and they're all made by "industry leaders" ;-)

Hollywood GPU is VLSI, not LSI

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a technical error in IGN's article. It states the following:

"The 'Hollywood' is a large-scale integrated chip that includes the GPU, DSP, I/O bridge and 3MBs of texture memory," a studio source told us.

Hollywood should be a very large-scale integrated chip, not a large-scale integrated chip. VLSI and LSI are both technical terms used in digital design. Either the studio source doesn't know the difference or the editors over in IGN think that removing the word "very" makes the article sound better. Still, there's quite a difference between the two terms.

Big Con

[Anonymous Coward]

all this talk about specs is just a waste of time. the big con here is the price we pay for our games. games should be $5 max. we are all conned big time.

the rip off prices is why i stopped playing games on a regular basis and i didnt buy any of the current generation of consoles. in the previous generation i only bought the n64 and that was a big disappointment. the only game i wanted on the ps1 was tekken2 and that wasnt worth buying a console just for one game.

i dont believe nintendos hype about innovation either. theyre not innovative at all, they just changed business model to go for the budget cheap hardware market and made up a load of propaganda about innovation to convince us theyre the ones to buy. they dont care about the consumer or innovation, theyre just after cold hard cash.

now as for the supposed specs for the revolution, assuming the gamecube is about equal to the xbox and the revolution is said to be at least twice as powerful as the gamebube, and the xbox360 is said to be about 4 times as powerful as the xbox... that would make the xbox360 twice as powerful as the revolution. development sources say the ps3 is equal to the xbox360 or only slightly better at best. so overall the ps3 = xbox360 = 2 x revolution. this is a massive gap in power on paper, however as discussed earlier when viewing all 3 consoles at 480p the gap might not be that visible. not many people have hdtv's so hd isnt an issue yet and probably wont be untill the next generation of consoles in 4 or 5 years time.

the main worry for nintendo is getting good quality games for the revolution (including all the big franchise games as well as any new innovative games) and making sure that dubious new controller of theirs is actually good for games. id prefer to see a larger version of the snes pad (for western hands) with more buttons and all the mod cons we have nowadays.

as i stated at the start of my post its the price that kills my enthusiam for gaming and is the biggest con of all. id actually pay $600 for a console if all the games were $5 each, then it would be worth it. nintendos revolution will be below $300 but i dont care cos the games will be $50 each, thats just too much. id only consider buying the revolution if it was $99, i could get the games for $20 or less (id prefer $5 but thats never going to happen), and there was a huge selection of top quality games (big name games as well as these magical innovative ones nintendo keeps going on about).

on a different note before i close, ive heard the revolution development kits are only $2000 each which is peanuts for a console dev kit. i'm a software engineer myself and i'd be tempted to get one to have a play around but does anyone know how easy it is to obtain one and what the conditions are?

laters people, lets all boycott the ridiculous games prices and cause a real revolution!