Merrick: Revolution Specs probably will never be released

[pakpassion]

In an interview with Dutch magazine [N]Gamer, senior director of marketing Jim Merrick is quoted as saying: "Regarding the specifications, we will probably never 'release' this information as we feel that it is largely irrelevant.

"While some of our competitors enjoy comparing specifications, it has little or nothing to do with how satisfied the consumers will be with the system and the games once they are released."

And there was no budging him, either: "I know people are hungry for information on Revolution and we respect and appreciate that, but we don't want to contribute to the cloud of meaningless information that surrounds the next generation systems."

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=61492

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

In other words they are'nt posting spec's because they are inferrior and in the public's eye's that it bad and so that they avoid all the comparison's.

quite a smart move.

[BlueTsunami]

"I know people are hungry for information on Revolution and we respect and appreciate that, but we don't want to contribute to the cloud of meaningless information that surrounds the next generation systems."

Makes me sad but I guess thats pretty true. I want to know though.

:(

[wireframe]

While I agree with the sentiment, I am not sure how well received this will be in the market. These things have a way of taking on a life of their own (look at all the forum posts just throwing "meaningless" specs back and forth). This could end up alienating the fan base and the consequence would be a return of the favor.

Once the Revolution is released and the specs become known, will the lack of hype leading up to the actual implementation make perception swing one way or the other?

I am all for "it's about the games," but there is a geek living somewhere in my head that wants to gather meaningless information, like hardware specifications, in great abundance. Just gimmie!

[StefanS]

I am not sure, but Nintendo never released a flops number for GCN, did it? If I remember correctly, they only released a conservative estimate of real world in game polygon performance.

[Shifty Geezer]

This is the console equivalent of taking the Fifth. "We refuse to disclose the specs of our machine on the grounds we will thus prove it's not as powerful as the rivals."

On the one hand it's fair and proper. Average Joe doesn't know sqat about specs anyway, and Slightly-More-Educated-Then-Average-Tom doesn't really understand the specs and makes wrong comparisons. But for a technical forum like this and for the technophiles, this statements sucks. Perhaps we'll get details anyway from IBM and ATi information?

[Nesh]

In other words they are'nt posting spec's because they are inferrior and in the public's eye's that it bad and so that they avoid all the comparison's.

quite a smart move.
Ofcourse.Thats why the found an alternative idea to make the experience different with the controller.
Inferior or not, Revolution isnt about hardware anyways. ;)
If they post specs people will judge and critisize the Revolution too soon on something that has nothing to do with what it is supposed to offer.

[london-boy]

They might not "release" specs, but it surely won't take loke till someone rather than Nintendo opens up the box and analyses the chips. It really is kinda simple, unless they make Nintendo chips no one knows anything about, which they won't, they will use IBM and ATI chips, with known quantities and qualities of memory.

[Guden Oden]

Developers will of course know the specs, and one way or another they will leak out. No console had fully disclosed specs anyway by their manufacturer, particulars about the hardware is always withheld, but have cropped up on this board anyway (such as things that differ between xgpu and geforce 3/4, or the weirdo blending modes of the graphics synth, or TEV specifics in flipper).

[Rodéric]

On the one hand it's fair and proper. Average Joe doesn't know sqat about specs anyway, and Slightly-More-Educated-Then-Average-Tom doesn't really understand the specs and makes wrong comparisons. But for a technical forum like this and for the technophiles, this statements sucks.

Exactly my opinion.

[PC-Engine]

I am not sure, but Nintendo never released a flops number for GCN, did it? If I remember correctly, they only released a conservative estimate of real world in game polygon performance.

Actually they did. It was 10.5GFLOPS for CPU+TnL. As for the rest of the specs.

http://www.nintendo.com/techspecgcn

[Carl B]

I think it's a smart stance by Nintendo - I doubt the average person cares or will have it factor in to a Nintendo purchase decision. It sucks for us, but as has been mentioned hopefully the info will leak.

[Teasy]

"Regarding the specifications, we will probably never 'release' this information as we feel that it is largely irrelevant."

[london-boy]

Well the devs will have to know what they're coding for, so eventually the word will spread.

I think Nintendo's message is not "We don't want people to know the specs", their message is "We will not base our marketing campaign on specs, unlike our competitors". Then if people are so eager to know the specs (a very small minority made of internet geeks like us really), i'm sure they will find ways to know.

Can't say i don't see the good side of that.

[mckmas8808]

I think it's a smart stance by Nintendo - I doubt the average person cares or will have it factor in to a Nintendo purchase decision. It sucks for us, but as has been mentioned hopefully the info will leak.

Not smart if you ask me. I'm sure some people also thought Nintendo not worrying about online gaming was smart too.:razz: Seriously what are they scared of? If your games are SOOO good and "innovative" then releasing the specs shouldn't hurt right?

I mean if this machine is suppose to be a revolution then how can some damn numbers stop it's HUGE change to the world?:???:

[Powderkeg]

This is a horrible move from a PR point of view.

Even people who don't understand the first thing about specs knows that if you have 2 competitors willing to put theirs on the box, and a third that does not, the third is probably hiding something unpleasant.

Discretion in the product you are selling breeds mistrust of your product. If you want to attract the non-gamer to your system, you've got to make the non-gamer trust you, and keeping obvious secrets from them isn't really the way to go about building that trust.

[wireframe]

But the question remains about how important this hype is and how influential the "geeks" are in carrying the torch for the platform on a technical level. I tend to think this sort of information filters down even though (especially though) people don't generally understand what these numbers mean. The consumer wants to feel they are making an informed choice and while I agree that it should be about the games, we have to admit that theoreticals play a part in this. On some level it even figures into the games as people will look at launch (or currently available titles at the time of purchase) and try to assess future game performance by playing the specs game. They may not do so correctly, but they want to feel like they are on top of things.

I am, of course, speaking generally here and not about how you or I may go about it.

PS. I am actually not much of a console "type," only having recently purchased a PS2 after a twenty year sabatical since the Atari 2600. However, I see strong potential in consoles and we see how the few with "numbers" can affect the PC world, so why not the console one?

[Carl B]

Not smart if you ask me. I'm sure some people also thought Nintendo not worrying about online gaming was smart too.:razz: Seriously what are they scared of? If your games are SOOO good and "innovative" then releasing the specs shouldn't hurt right?

I mean if this machine is suppose to be a revolution then how can some damn numbers stop it's HUGE change to the world?:???:

It's like this: who in the world that was buying a Nintendo before actually knew what the specs were? Who among those even know that there are power specs that could be compared?

I just don't see this effecting the parent in the store whatsoever. I am among one of the few individuals inconvenienced by this. ;)

[Shifty Geezer]

I mean if this machine is suppose to be a revolution then how can some damn numbers stop it's HUGE change to the world?:???:BEcause if you give people something else to focus on, they won't necessarily look at what's important. If Nintendo release specs that are a quarter of the oppositions say, in the various playgrounds of this world word will out that Revolution is less of a machine which will in turn affect people's attitude. It might have the best games ever but if there's a stigma due to owning an inferior console, people won't buy it. And that hapens for sure. There's whole industry's created built on absolutely nothing than bigger umbers. Designer gear sells so that people can wear it and advertise the fact they've spent more money than lesser people. People worry all the time about what other people think of their height, weight, car, yadayadayada. People measure themselves against each other in an attempt to determine where they come, and numbers are the main form of measurement. Why else do we have a Guiness Book of Records??

If you look at it the other way, as Nintendo have, if what's important is the games, why do people want to know the specs? If it looks good, who cares if it's running 1 million poly's a second or 1 trillion? Stats only exist for theoretical comparisons (c'mon, you've been here long enough to know that firsthand!!). Instead of comparing Revolution's stats to XB360s and PS3s, Nintenod want people to compare Nintendo's games to XB360s and PS3s. Stats have absolutely no positive contribution to that, so why bother releasing that info, especially when some parties will turn that potentially into negative marketting?

[mckmas8808]

It's like this: who in the world that was buying a Nintendo before actually knew what the specs were? Who among those even know that there are power specs that could be compared?

I just don't see this effecting the parent in the store whatsoever. I am among one of the few individuals inconvenienced by this. ;)

You're right. If most people wouldn't be affect in the store on a everyday level, then why go against the grain and not release specs. I mean they even released specs for the DS even though the PSP was a million times more powerful.

[mckmas8808]

BEcause if you give people something else to focus on, they won't necessarily look at what's important. If Nintendo release specs that are a quarter of the oppositions say, in the various playgrounds of this world word will out that Revolution is less of a machine which will in turn affect people's attitude. It might have the best games ever but if there's a stigma due to owning an inferior console, people won't buy it. And that hapens for sure. There's whole industry's created built on absolutely nothing than bigger umbers. Designer gear sells so that people can wear it and advertise the fact they've spent more money than lesser people. People worry all the time about what other people think of their height, weight, car, yadayadayada. People measure themselves against each other in an attempt to determine where they come, and numbers are the main form of measurement. Why else do we have a Guiness Book of Records??

If you look at it the other way, as Nintendo have, if what's important is the games, why do people want to know the specs? If it looks good, who cares if it's running 1 million poly's a second or 1 trillion? Stats only exist for theoretical comparisons (c'mon, you've been here long enough to know that firsthand!!). Instead of comparing Revolution's stats to XB360s and PS3s, Nintenod want people to compare Nintendo's games to XB360s and PS3s. Stats have absolutely no positive contribution to that, so why bother releasing that info, especially when some parties will turn that potentially into negative marketting?

I agree 100%, its just pisses me off that Nintendo is going against the grain once again. You know how Nintendo is as of late. They are always hating on what's hot and saying things need to change. Their appoach to certain things is what really is getting me mad not this issue actually. This no specs thing is just adding fuel to the fire for me really.

[Shifty Geezer]

Nintendo were just following the standard trends. Release hardware and release specs. Now they're thinking 'why are we doing this? Just because everyone else does, when it doesn't actually make for a comparison of what we're about. Let's stop playing by everyone else's rules. Let's where Boss in Motion and be denied access to the party!'

[Powderkeg]

If you look at it the other way, as Nintendo have, if what's important is the games, why do people want to know the specs? If it looks good, who cares if it's running 1 million poly's a second or 1 trillion? Stats only exist for theoretical comparisons (c'mon, you've been here long enough to know that firsthand!!). Instead of comparing Revolution's stats to XB360s and PS3s, Nintenod want people to compare Nintendo's games to XB360s and PS3s. Stats have absolutely no positive contribution to that, so why bother releasing that info, especially when some parties will turn that potentially into negative marketting?

That's like suggesting that car specs don't matter to consumers. Who cares how much horsepower or torque it has? Who cares if it's a V6 of V8? Rear wheel drive or front wheel drive? All that matters is how it runs and drives, right?

Could you imagine trying to sell a new car without including those specs?

Even people who don't understand them know how and where to look for them when they pick up the box. If Nintendo's are missing while the 360 and PS3 have theirs listed on the box, people will notice and it will effect their decision.

The only ones who don't care enough to look at the box and compare are Nintendo fans who would buy a Nintendo system no matter what it was.

[london-boy]

That's like suggesting that car specs don't matter to consumers. Who cares how much horsepower or torque it has? Who cares if it's a V6 of V8? Rear wheel drive or front wheel drive? All that matters is how it runs and drives, right?

Could you imagine trying to sell a new car without including those specs?

Even people who don't understand them know how and where to look for them when they pick up the box. If Nintendo's are missing while the 360 and PS3 have theirs listed on the box, people will notice and it will effect their decision.

The only ones who don't care enough to look at the box and compare are Nintendo fans who would buy a Nintendo system no matter what it was.


Well many people buy cars cause they just look good without knowing anything about how they work.

You seem to think that just because you care a lot about geeky specs, then everyone else does.

[OVERLORD]

Not smart if you ask me. I'm sure some people also thought Nintendo not worrying about online gaming was smart too.:razz: Seriously what are they scared of? If your games are SOOO good and "innovative" then releasing the specs shouldn't hurt right?

I mean if this machine is suppose to be a revolution then how can some damn numbers stop it's HUGE change to the world?:???:

Look what happened when another iconic firm acted this way http://www.snopes.com/sources/cokelore/secrform.htm


http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/formula.asp

Ernest Woodruff (he who was Coca-Cola from 1916 through about 1931) reveled in the secrecy of the formula, knowing that making a big to-do about it would convince the media — and thus the general public — that they were getting something really special when they bought a Coke. In 1925, the only written copy of its formula Coca-Cola admits to having was retrieved from a New York bank (where it had been held as collateral on a sugar loan) and reverently laid in safe deposit box in Woodruff's Atlanta bank, the Trust Company of Georgia (which later merged with Sun Bank of Florida, creating SunTrust Bank).


?

That's like suggesting that car specs don't matter to consumers. Who cares how much horsepower or torque it has? Who cares if it's a V6 of V8? Rear wheel drive or front wheel drive? All that matters is how it runs and drives, right?

Could you imagine trying to sell a new car without including those specs?

Even people who don't understand them know how and where to look for them when they pick up the box. If Nintendo's are missing while the 360 and PS3 have theirs listed on the box, people will notice and it will effect their decision.

The only ones who don't care enough to look at the box and compare are Nintendo fans who would buy a Nintendo system no matter what it was.

Speaking of cars. Let's look @ turbulent F1 history.

The rear engine revolution
1958 was a watershed in another crucial way for Formula One. Stirling Moss won the Argentina GP driving a rear-engined Cooper entered by the private team of Rob Walker, and powered by a 2 L Coventry-Climax Straight-4s. This was the first victory of a rear-engined (actually mid-engined) car in Formula One. The next GP in Monaco was also won by the same Cooper driven by Maurice Trintignant. Powered by engine of less than 2.5 L, the Coopers remained outsiders in 1958 ; but as soon as the new 2.5 L Coventry-Climax engine was available, the Coopers went on to dominate Formula One for three years. While their fellow British teams of Lotus and BRM also switched to rear-engined machines, Enzo Ferrari adopted a retrograde attitude claiming "the horses pull the car rather than push it". Australian Jack Brabham claimed the first two of his three titles in the little British cars, the last two championships held with the 2.5 L formula.

[Powderkeg]

Well many people buy cars cause they just look good without knowing anything about how they work.

Yes, but would they buy a car when the manufacturer refused to tell them what it was equipped with? I've never met anyone who didn't look at the sticker on the window to see what came in the car before they bought it, and I don't know a one who would buy a car if that feature sticker was missing and the dealer wouldn't tell them what was in it.

You seem to think that just because you care a lot about geeky specs, then everyone else does.

Everyone who hasn't pre-decided what they want to buy compares. If you've got 2 companies that are open about their product, and one who isn't, which side do you think the person who compares is probably going to go with?

[pipo]

It's only interesting for nerds like us.

Who cares about the specs of the DS? Who cares about the chipset or flops inside a DVD player?

But like I said, I'd really like to know the internals. ;)

[Carl B]

Yes, but would they buy a car when the manufacturer refused to tell them what it was equipped with? I've never met anyone who didn't look at the sticker on the window to see what came in the car before they bought it, and I don't know a one who would buy a car if that feature sticker was missing and the dealer wouldn't tell them what was in it.

But the equivelent to those 'specs' on a car for a console are simply the features and the games. Or do you think they should post the specs up at game stores so people can compare what really matters to them? Games (and nowadays features) are the relevent metric for consoles, not horsepower.


Everyone who hasn't pre-decided what they want to buy compares. If you've got 2 companies that are open about their product, and one who isn't, which side do you think the person who compares is probably going to go with?

I guarantee you that 90% of consumers have no idea that Sony and Microsoft *are* open about their specs, let alone the notion that Nintendo isn't. And I assure you, after learning that, 90% of those probably still wouldn't care. I plan on buying a Rev, and it certainly has nothing to do with the frequency it's chips run at.

[mckmas8808]

I guarantee you that 90% of consumers have no idea that Sony and Microsoft *are* open about their specs, let alone the notion that Nintendo isn't. And I assure you, after learning that, 90% of those probably still wouldn't care. I plan on buying a Rev, and it certainly has nothing to do with the frequency it's chips run at.

But honestly guys don't most consumers of videogames compare the power of the consoles by looking at actual games? Most people knew the Xbox was the most powerful due to the fact that the games looked the best, not because J Allard told them it was. I mean lets be honest that is correct right?

[Carl B]

But honestly guys don't most consumers of videogames compare the power of the consoles by looking at actual games? Most people knew the Xbox was the most powerful due to the fact that the games looked the best, not because J Allard told them it was. I mean lets be honest that is correct right?

I just don't understand though, who that would be looking into a Revolution would even care about it's power outside of an interest in the engineering (like us) anyway? I mean, Revolution could be little more powerful than GameCube - that's not the reason I (and I suspect others) would be buying it in the least. Sure Nintendo might miss out on some customers by not catering to the 'power' crowd, but that was a fight it was going to lose anyway.

And educated consumers find their own way, and will do the screen shot comparissons (as you suggest) to compare power if that's important to them. A parent in the store isn't going to be doing that, and doesn't care which is more powerful, lest likely the salesman tells them they should care.

[Powderkeg]

But the equivelent to those 'specs' on a car for a console are simply the features and the games. Or do you think they should post the specs up at game stores so people can compare what really matters to them? Games (and nowadays features) are the relevent metric for consoles, not horsepower.

Look, you believe what you want. I'm not going to shatter your delusions.

But a console is hardware, and people who compare will compare the hardware. They will look at the big expensive box and see what is written on it and compare it to their competition. Maybe not in your world, but here on earth that's how it works for anyone who is indecisive in a significant product purchase.



I guarantee you that 90% of consumers have no idea that Sony and Microsoft *are* open about their specs, let alone the notion that Nintendo isn't. And I assure you, after learning that, 90% of those probably still wouldn't care.

I guarantee you anyone who isn't already a Nintendo fan will compare what is written on the PS3, 360, and Revolution boxes, and if a big spec chart is missing from Nintendo's, they will notice, and they will care. People don't like getting ripped off, and when you hide something like hardware specs they tend not to feel comfortable.

I plan on buying a Rev, and it certainly has nothing to do with the frequency it's chips run at.

You are an established Nintendo fan. One of a small minority of the console gaming market and an even smaller minority among non-gamers. The only ones who think like you are also established Nintendo fans, and most of you already own a Gamecube so we've already got a good idea of your numbers in the grand scheme of things.

[Powderkeg]

A parent in the store isn't going to be doing that, and doesn't care which is more powerful, lest likely the salesman tells them they should care.

Do you think this is still 1980?

That parent in the store grew up with gaming, and chances are, they are looking at that system as much for themselves as they are for their kids. the average age of a video gamer is in their mid to late twenties now, which also happens to be the average age of parents as well.

[Shifty Geezer]

But honestly guys don't most consumers of videogames compare the power of the consoles by looking at actual games? Most people knew the Xbox was the most powerful due to the fact that the games looked the best, not because J Allard told them it was. I mean lets be honest that is correct right?No. Many people (ordinary Joes) can't see much difference. Heck, I can't see emuch difference. And who bought XB because it had higher specs? The average Joe?

For the car analogy, specs don't indicate real performance. BHP is meaningless with full explanation such as weight. Consoles don't have standard comparison by which they can be measured. A high value might not actually mean better performance.

And finally, you can't measure a cars 'fun-to-drive-ness' from stats. You need to test drive it. You can't measure games' playability from stats. For playability stats aren't going to mean much.

Some people are obviously looking at these consoles like they would CE goods. You'd buy a TV on specs and a computer, so why not a console? But do you chose a meal on specs? Do you go into a restaurant and choose which food you want based on a comparison of nutritional content? Is that how you chose between different burger bars? When deciding MacDonalds, Wimpy or Burger King, you don't choose best on which tastes the nicest to you but by looking at the ingredients? What about the colour you paint your house? Do you look at the types of dye used and choose the colour by the most technically advanced pigment? How's about cuddly toys for your children? Do you look at 'hairs per square inch' comparisons and tests for squishiness, or just look at the ones that look cute and pick 'em up and squeeze them? And what about music? Or movies? Does a scientific comparison of use of musical techniques decide for you which artists to buy, and details of budget and script techniques emplyed determine which films you go watch? DO you buy games based on a list on the back of how many poly's per second it's doing and how many lights and shadows?

A scientific analytical comparison is not the only way to determine the qualities of a 'thing', nor is it even inteliigently applicable in many instances. And scientific analysis doesn't work for gameplay.

[Powderkeg]

But honestly guys don't most consumers of videogames compare the power of the consoles by looking at actual games?

Do you remember the "Untapped power of the PS2?"

I remember this past gen just fine, and I recall that it took about 3 years before most people openly admitted the Xbox was flat out more powerful, and you still find some Nintendo fans that try to dispute that to a large degree. (Citing one or two GCN games graphics as their sole evidence that the GCN is just as good)

[london-boy]

Yes, but would they buy a car when the manufacturer refused to tell them what it was equipped with? I've never met anyone who didn't look at the sticker on the window to see what came in the car before they bought it, and I don't know a one who would buy a car if that feature sticker was missing and the dealer wouldn't tell them what was in it.



Everyone who hasn't pre-decided what they want to buy compares. If you've got 2 companies that are open about their product, and one who isn't, which side do you think the person who compares is probably going to go with?


Well, to me the vastest majority of people want to know WHAT a product does, not HOW it does it.

Besides, as i've said many times, comparing cars to consoles is flawed. Consoles are instruments through which people play software. Cars are cars.

The vastest majority of people are ok knowing that their console (or their DVD player) has some kinds of outputs to make them play things properly according to the TV they have (for example). They have NO idea that their PS2 has 2 VUs, one of which is hardly ever used properly, and a GS. They might know that it has 32MB or RAM but that's about it. They know about the Emotion Engine because Sony hyped it to death.

They know that PS2 can play PS1 games, but i challenge to find a lot of "casual gamers" (people who do not post on here) who know HOW it does it.

They do not know HOW it works. Not many people on here know either for god's sake!!

Knowing how a car works is different becasue people are more likely to get informed about their car purchase, first of all because they're spending a whole lot of money for it, and also because of safety reasons. You just cannot compare the two.

[Teasy]

I mean they even released specs for the DS even though the PSP was a million times more powerful.

They didn't release specs for DS, not really. They said it used a ARM7 and ARM9 CPU but said very little else about the hardware. To this day they haven't even confirmed that it has a GPU, never mind give specifics on it (like pixel pipes, fillrate, hardware T&L ect).

[Shifty Geezer]

I guarantee you anyone who isn't already a Nintendo fan will compare what is written on the PS3, 360, and Revolution boxes, and if a big spec chart is missing from Nintendo's, they will notice, and they will care. People don't like getting ripped off, and when you hide something like hardware specs they tend not to feel comfortable.Oh pur-leeeezzzzz :roll: Yeah, I was looking at the Revolution's controller and getting really excited about the types of games I'd be able to play, and in the store they had a demo that looked realy good. Maybe not as sharp as the XB360 on it's HD screen but it looked good anyway (and didn't have wierd red triangles on it :p). And the game was really fun - a sword fighting thing. I loved it, and my kids loved it too. Most fun I'd had in ages. I was almost sold, and then I saw there wasn't a spec chart. What, no specs chart?! So I'm not going to buy it. Plain and simple. If they can't provide numbers then forget it. What kind of idiot thinks I'm going to buy a games console to play games by providing fun demo games but no numbers chart?

[Carl B]

Look, you believe what you want. I'm not going to shatter your delusions.

But a console is hardware, and people who compare will compare the hardware. They will look at the big expensive box and see what is written on it and compare it to their competition. Maybe not in your world, but here on earth that's how it works for anyone who is indecisive in a significant product purchase.

I guarantee you anyone who isn't already a Nintendo fan will compare what is written on the PS3, 360, and Revolution boxes, and if a big spec chart is missing from Nintendo's, they will notice, and they will care. People don't like getting ripped off, and when you hide something like hardware specs they tend not to feel comfortable.

You are an established Nintendo fan. One of a small minority of the console gaming market and an even smaller minority among non-gamers. The only ones who think like you are also established Nintendo fans, and most of you already own a Gamecube so we've already got a good idea of your numbers in the grand scheme of things.

Powderkeg, it's so tiring dealing with you day after day...

First, the whole disclosure thing. Then, the Sony debt thing. Followed by the XBox kiosk/Samsung thing. All of your claims - they're just based on your own world view, which you assume to be right without doing any research. And now you're here telling me that parents go into the store, look at the boxes(!?!?) to see which consoles have higher specs before making a decision? Because... they're game savvy?

Well, I'm old enough to have children, and as someone who owned way back to the NES and C64, I can tell you I didn't care diddly-squat about the specs back then, and my only interest now has to do with an interest in business and technology. Hardly because it effects my gaming habits.

If you live in a world where everyone who goes to the store bases the majority of their decision on which console has which specs, then yes - I'm living ina different world than you. As rarely as I find myself in a games store, I do notice people's behavior - and not once in my life have I ever heard someone inquiring about power or looking at a box for specs.

Let me ask you, if PS3 is more powerful than 360, are you jumping ship?

[Powderkeg]

But do you chose a meal on specs? Do you go into a restaurant and choose which food you want based on a comparison of nutritional content? Is that how you chose between different burger bars? When deciding MacDonalds, Wimpy or Burger King, you don't choose best on which tastes the nicest to you but by looking at the ingredients?

Ingedients are an absolute basis of comparison. Do you go into a restraunt and order food without knowing or caring about what food you just ordered? Ever order a steak and not specify how you wanted it cooked? How do you decide which entree to get if you don't compare what each one is made of?

What about the colour you paint your house? Do you look at the types of dye used and choose the colour by the most technically advanced pigment?

Yes to a degree. I certainly compare the quality of the dyes used, since poor quality means I have to use more paint and it means I have to repaint more frequently which costs both money and time.

How's about cuddly toys for your children? Do you look at 'hairs per square inch' comparisons and tests for squishiness, or just look at the ones that look cute and pick 'em up and squeeze them?

I definitely look at what they are made of, how well they are made, what's included in the box, and what do the alternatives provide.

You don't ahve kids, do you?

And what about music? Or movies? Does a scientific comparison of use of musical techniques decide for you which artists to buy, and details of budget and script techniques emplyed determine which films you go watch?

Would you consider 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio a spec? Would you buy a DVD without knowing which of those the movie is in?

DO you buy games based on a list on the back of how many poly's per second it's doing and how many lights and shadows?

Not games, but I do buy gaming hardware based on those figures. And last time I checked, a console is gaming hardware.

A scientific analytical comparison is not the only way to determine the qualities of a 'thing', nor is it even inteliigently applicable in many instances. And scientific analysis doesn't work for gameplay.

And when people pick up the box that the console comes in, how can they tell what the gameplay is like by holding that box? What on that box is going to tell them that the contents are as good or better than the contents of their competitors box? Are they likely to even try the gameplay if their competitors box looks like it's a clearly better deal? (Especially when their competitor will clearly have a lot more games as well)

[mckmas8808]

But do you chose a meal on specs? Do you go into a restaurant and choose which food you want based on a comparison of nutritional content? Is that how you chose between different burger bars? When deciding MacDonalds, Wimpy or Burger King, you don't choose best on which tastes the nicest to you but by looking at the ingredients?

Actually I do chose my meal based on specs.:lol: I'm trying to put on 20 pounds of muscle so eating fatty foods is a no no for me. And I have to increase my protein and calorie intake so...

[Powderkeg]

Well, I'm old enough to have children, and as someone who owned way back to the NES and C64, I can tell you I didn't care diddly-squat about the specs back then, and my only interest now has to do with an interest in business and technology. Hardly because it effects my gaming habits.

You didn't care about the specs when you were a child so now that your grown and a parent that means other parents don't care about specs now?

Do you have a problem with logical thinking? Or is it a touch of fanyoungmanism? Your name doesn't exactly suggest an open mind or rational discussion in regards to consoles you know.

If you live in a world where everyone who goes to the store bases the majority of their decision on which console has which specs, then yes - I'm living ina different world than you.

Clearly. You live in a world where everyone is apparently incredibly stupid and are purely impulse buyers who don't care about their money or what they spend it on. If it looks good at the moment, buy it, and they don't even care what they are buying.

That's not earth. Don't know what planet it is, but it's certainly not this one.

As rarely as I find myself in a games store, I do notice people's behavior - and not once in my life have I ever heard someone inquiring about power or looking at a box for specs.

Try walking into any major retailer and see if you can find someone who is comparitive shipping for any product that doesn't compare what they are shopping for.

People in game stores typically know exactly what they want before they walk in, but the vast majority of game consoles are sold through major retailers like Walmart or Best Buy, not gaming stores.

Let me ask you, if PS3 is more powerful than 360, are you jumping ship?

I plan on buying both, so which ship would I be jumping from/to?

Unlike you, I am not a fanyoungman of a particular system, and I don't feel the need to defend it even against someone who is agreing with me, such as you did by telling me I was wrong when I agreed that it looked like Nvidia and Sony had been working for 2 years on RSX and spent a significant amount of R&D on the project. There I was agreeing with Sony and Nvidia reps, and you were telling me I was wrong, mostly because you are so emotionally attached to your fanyoungmanism that you are incapable of being rational.

[fearsomepirate]

Look, you believe what you want. I'm not going to shatter your delusions.

But a console is hardware, and people who compare will compare the hardware. They will look at the big expensive box and see what is written on it and compare it to their competition. Maybe not in your world, but here on earth that's how it works for anyone who is indecisive in a significant product purchase.

I guarantee you anyone who isn't already a Nintendo fan will compare what is written on the PS3, 360, and Revolution boxes, and if a big spec chart is missing from Nintendo's, they will notice, and they will care. People don't like getting ripped off, and when you hide something like hardware specs they tend not to feel comfortable.

You are an established Nintendo fan. One of a small minority of the console gaming market and an even smaller minority among non-gamers. The only ones who think like you are also established Nintendo fans, and most of you already own a Gamecube so we've already got a good idea of your numbers in the grand scheme of things.

You've been living in the geek world for far too long. Out of all my friends (and yeah, I have more than 3 :wink:), I'm the only person who knows how much RAM is in the Xbox, what clockspeed the Flipper runs at, and how many pipelines are in the GS (yes, that's an anecdote, but my experience is typical). Casual gamers don't know these things, and they don't seem to care. I also didn't notice a "big spec chart" on the boxes for my Xbox, Cube, DS, SNES, and N64. If there were any specs there, they were small. Even the giant Xbox 360 poster in the local Gamestop doesn't have any specs on it.

The $150 PS2 continues to outsell the $150 Xbox despite having far inferior specs and lacking a hard drive. It also blows away the $99 GameCube, which also has superior specs. Clearly, these spec addicts don't make up a large portion of the market, or maybe Xbox would have had better sales in its first 2 years.

The people who buy consoles based on spec won't be buying Revolution anyway. That's a done deal. Either way, they've lost you as a customer, and publishing a spec sheet doesn't change that. However, publishing low specs does generate negative buzz. Nintendo doesn't need "Oh man, it's only 1/10 as powerful as 360, the specs say so!" floating around out there. They need to keep any negative spec buzz down as low as possible. Why generate negative buzz among your target audience in order to satisfy someone who won't buy your product anyway?

[Carl B]

You didn't care about the specs when you were a child so now that your grown and a parent that means other parents don't care about specs now?

Do you have a problem with logical thinking? Or is it a touch of fanyoungmanism? Your name doesn't exactly suggest an open mind or rational discussion in regards to consoles you know.



Clearly. You live in a world where everyone is apparently incredibly stupid and are purely impulse buyers who don't care about their money or what they spend it on. If it looks good at the moment, buy it, and they don't even care what they are buying.

That's not earth. Don't know what planet it is, but it's certainly not this one.



Try walking into any major retailer and see if you can find someone who is comparitive shipping for any product that doesn't compare what they are shopping for.

People in game stores typically know exactly what they want before they walk in, but the vast majority of game consoles are sold through major retailers like Walmart or Best Buy, not gaming stores.



I plan on buying both, so which ship would I be jumping from/to?

Unlike you, I am not a fanyoungman of a particular system, and I don't feel the need to defend it even against someone who is agreing with me, such as you did by telling me I was wrong when I agreed that it looked like Nvidia and Sony had been working for 2 years on RSX and spent a significant amount of R&D on the project. There I was agreeing with Sony and Nvidia reps, and you were telling me I was wrong, mostly because you are so emotionally attached to your fanyoungmanism that you are incapable of being rational.


LOL, I like your 'fanyoungman' thing by the way - the fact that you can invent such a word captures your character perfectly. ;)

Yeah my name is regretable, no doubt. But you should know better than to bring it up, since I'm no 'fanyoungman.' Even if (successfully) I was pointing out reasons to believe that NVidia/Sony collaboration had begun before December 2004.

Listen Powderkeg, consoles are for games. Just like you buy a movie based on the content and not the level of the CG or special effects contained within. (who knows with you though) If a game appeals to a certain buyer, they will likely purchase the system that allows them to play the game they like. Is that concept so hard for you? Knowing DS is weaker than PSP hasn't ended it's career, do you agree?

[Shifty Geezer]

Ingedients are an absolute basis of comparison. Do you go into a restraunt and order food without knowing or caring about what food you just ordered? Ever order a steak and not specify how you wanted it cooked? How do you decide which entree to get if you don't compare what each one is made of? overall impression of what to expect, and I took the chance to be surprised.

I definitely look at what they are made of, how well they are made, what's included in the box, and what do the alternatives provide.That's different to the specs. When you want a soft fluffy toy, do you find the one that's soft and fluffy by touching it and squeezing it, or by looking at numbers that define how soft and fluffy it is?
Would you consider 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio a spec? Would you buy a DVD without knowing which of those the movie is in?That's the technical specs of the media, telling me how it'll look. I was asking if you choose a FILM (not the media it's recorded on) by the specs?

It seems you are one of those people who places emphasis on statistics and tends to take a very logical approach to decision making. That's well and good, but you're in the minority if that's the case. Most people make decisions in very different ways and the numbers that define various characteristics to the scientific analytical brains go mostly overlooked. People buy a dog based on the breed they like - what it looks like. They don't lok up for longevitiy, likelihood of diseases, of genetic breed related problems, and choose a dog they like based SOLELY on those specs. They choose clothes they like the look of, without seeing what it's made of, how long it will last, how quickly it will fade. Specs sheets can be used to sway people. Given two similar products use of figures can make the difference. I've known people buy a 1 GHz Pentium over a 800 MHz K6 because the number was bigger and they know enough to know bigger numbers=faster, but not that the numerical relations between different families of processors makes inter-family comparisons more complex than just a numbers game. But when a persons happy with something based on a visceral criteria, most people don't look for a numerical evaluation for the confidence to commit. If people like what they see of the Revolution in store, on screenshots and movies and box-art, they don't need ot know the numbers. They won't care to find out the numbers. They don't need confirmation that the game looks good 'because Revolution can handle 500 million vertices a second and runs at 3 GHz and has 3 processors running in parallel with 1T technology throughout.' Just seeing the game and liking it is enough.

The problem with stats is in marketting where if you compare two products it has an impact. If Nintendo show side-by-side with PS3 a game that looks just as good, and then a sheet of paper showing the numbers are half the size, people will likely go by the deciding factor (assuming no brand awareness etc.) which is buying PS3 means getting more numbers and a more powerful console. If Nintendo show unique fun games that look good and are not available on PS3, all the numbers in the world won't make any difference. Just like anyone wanting to play Nintendogs doesn't give a hoot what the Specs of DS are, nor that side-by-side with PSP the DS's specs are lower.

[Rodéric]

I can tell you people buy products over brand reputation, or they just come in and ask the reseller what console fit their gaming style, and which have the most games of their favorite genre, they don't care about specs at all.

Is it well known ?
Is it cute ?
Does it have lots of games ?
Does it have great games or franchises ?
Does it have good games that suite my gaming style ?
Does it have lots of games in my favorite genre ?
How does it compare in all these respects plus price to other products ?

With Revolution we might see "How does the pad work ?" type of question coming.


BTW Powderkeg we are well aware that you HATE Nintendo &/| the Revolution, so just give your opinion once, and stop derailing all threads about Nintendo or the Revolution.

[StefanS]

This is just ridiculous. Does anyone expect Nintendo to release a FLOPS number of the Revolution when they're aiming at 480p, while the competitors aim at 720p, 1080p respectively. Their numbers would naturally look inferior to X360 and PS3 even when they would still offer comparable graphics at 480p. They'd only shoot themselves in the foot.

BTW, does anyone remember the discussion about FLOPS this gen? MS claimed their Xbox would deliver 125GFLOPS. In comparison GCN delivered about 25GFLOPS, which was in the range of the PS2. Now, could any sane person claim that the Xbox looked 5times better than PS2 or GCN? Do you really think the average consumer went to next shop and bought the console that offered the most FLOPS?

[Clashman]

There's a couple tactics that have been taken in the past. Sometimes overwhelming your competition with paper specs works quite well, (see the Dreamcast vs PS2), sometimes it doesn't (see Xbox vs PS2). Personally, I think Nintendo is planning on copying Apple's strategy with the ipod and relying on style and perceptions of innovation to sell their product. The ipod was and is in many ways inferior to many of it's competitors when it comes to paper specs, but has thus far had an edge when it comes to style which has propelled it above and beyond the competition. Whether this kind of strategy would work with console gaming is something I'm not completely certain of, as console gaming doesn't necessarily function on the same mindset as the MP3 player market. Then again, Nintendo's design choices are seen as an attempt to expand beyond the traditional games-playing market, which wouldn't be necessarily as "tech-oriented" as the current one. We'll see how it works, I personally think I'll have to see it in action before I make up my mind.

[fulcizombie]

Wow that's pathetic even for current nintendo's standards.

I remember the n64 pre-launch days when Howard Linkoln wouldn't shut up about the n64 specs and how it was "a 64bti machine that shouldn't be compared to 32 bit machines.How do times change!Nintendo was cutting edge at Snes and N64 days and now nintendo fans get excited about playing...Nes&Snes games on a console that will be released in 2006!!!

It seems that the revolution's specs are worse that most suspected they would be.
Oh well Nintendo is loosing half of its user base with every console gen anyway......

[GwymWeepa]

What's the point of releasing specs other than to appease us nerds? The graphics will look fine at 480p, there, end of story. Releasing specs of a machine that has already been admitted to being inferior will only cast a negative shadow on the system and kill a huge chunk of hype.

[Reznor007]

Most people truly don't care about specs. Look at Bose speakers, they are considered by the general public to be great, yet they don't put any actual speaker specs on the box or anywhere on their site. I think they are the only large speaker company to not post specs actually.

Atari didn't get far from pushing the "64bit-ness" of the Jaguar did they?

What about Sega's full color Game Gear compared to monochrome Gameboy?

What about N64's power over PS1?

[Titanio]

I could have guessed as much. IIRC, Nintendo considered not releasing specs for Gamecube at the time, so I figured it was very likely they'd actually not do so this time around.

As long as the games look the part, or play the part more importantly I suppose, very few are going to care. Nintendo fans aren't going to care, and the average punter on the street isn't going to be aware of it.

That said, this will probably be the biggest "prize" for Nintendo editors everywhere, and I'd expect leaks ;)

[Inane_Dork]

I dislike it. You buy hardware, it's your right to know what it can do. If Nintendo believes power is not that relevant anymore, fine. But don't force your belief on everyone else.

And if the public rejects the Rev because its specs are so much lower than competitors', then I guess Nintendo doesn't have a bead on consumer interest after all. Yeah, it may be bad for gaming, but it would be Nintendo's fault.

[pc999]

I really doubt this will affect their rating, most people dont even care about the spec of their new PC, plus they only need to show a "equal" ss from FIFA or something like on the back of the box and then try to explain why one console having 3X the power show the same and still is "better" to a person with a normal TV. The specs are nice for us but for normal people (and beyond this I think that there will be even amung us (me for example) less people how care about raw specs, because of the difference of rez) see the "specs" in the ss at back of the game or in a movie if the difference is not imediate then there is no difference in "specs" for them is all that matters in terms of specs (plus the price).

[Almasy]

Oh pur-leeeezzzzz :roll: Yeah, I was looking at the Revolution's controller and getting really excited about the types of games I'd be able to play, and in the store they had a demo that looked realy good. Maybe not as sharp as the XB360 on it's HD screen but it looked good anyway (and didn't have wierd red triangles on it :p). And the game was really fun - a sword fighting thing. I loved it, and my kids loved it too. Most fun I'd had in ages. I was almost sold, and then I saw there wasn't a spec chart. What, no specs chart?! So I'm not going to buy it. Plain and simple. If they can't provide numbers then forget it. What kind of idiot thinks I'm going to buy a games console to play games by providing fun demo games but no numbers chart?

Oh, please, we all know you love Revolution, but nobody should defend Nintendo´s actions, which we can all agree that are done because their hardware is inferior enough to make a direct comparison a bad idea.

As a consumer, you have the right (or at least should) to know what lies inside of what you´re buying. No ifs or buts about it, those kind of specifications SHOULD be easily available on the packaging and/or official website if the consumer wishes to know. It´s not a matter of importance, it´s a matter of consumer rights. I´ve had enough of ridiculous Nintendo fans and their tripe to hear it all over again in beyond3d of all places.

[darkblu]

Oh, please, we all know you love Revolution, but nobody should defend Nintendo´s actions, which we can all agree that are done because their hardware is inferior enough to make a direct comparison a bad idea.

As a consumer, you have the right (or at least should) to know what lies inside of what you´re buying. No ifs or buts about it, those kind of specifications SHOULD be easily available on the packaging and/or official website if the consumer wishes to know. It´s not a matter of importance, it´s a matter of consumer rights. I´ve had enough of ridiculous Nintendo fans and their tripe to hear it all over again in beyond3d of all places.

Almasy, you sure you didn't mean to begin your 2nd paragraph with 'as a nintendo basher'?

oh, and next time you play a game on your 'open-spec' console don't forget to keep an eye on the performance analyzer panel on the front of the console to see how much of those flops actually get utilized at each and every moment.

pathetic.

[Shifty Geezer]

Oh, please, we all know you love RevolutionReally? First I knew about my love for Revolution!!
, but nobody should defend Nintendo´s actions, which we can all agree that are done because their hardware is inferior enough to make a direct comparison a bad idea.Which I've NEVER disputed. Hence my first post in this thread ...
This is the console equivalent of taking the Fifth. "We refuse to disclose the specs of our machine on the grounds we will thus prove it's not as powerful as the rivals."
As a consumer, you have the right (or at least should) to know what lies inside of what you´re buying. No ifs or buts about it, those kind of specifications SHOULD be easily available on the packaging and/or official website if the consumer wishes to know. It´s not a matter of importance, it´s a matter of consumer rights.What utter crock! You've a right (depending on your national laws) to a product that does what it's supposed to do. If Rev doesn't provide fun entertaining games you can take it back to the store for a refund. There's no law AFAIK whatsoever on any country on this planet saying specs or explanations of how the technology of a device works needs to be included. Honestly! How many of you refused to buy a DVD player because the brochure didn't list RAMDAC speeds and memory amounts? Or pin counts on the IO chip? No-one's forcing you to buy it. If you aren't comfortable buying a device without first seeing a bullet-point summary of it's contents you don't have to. For everyone else, if they like what they see on the screen that's all they need for an informed decision. You don't need to know the internal workings of a console to decide whether to buy it or not. I didn't when I bought PS2. I saw games I liked, had friends with one, so bought it long before I knew it had two VUs etc. There no legal nor natural right for me to deamand to be informed of all the inner workings (some of which may be trade secrets, though unlikely in this industry) and in most people not the slightest curiosity to know either.

Anyhow, we're at an impass with people expressing POV's here over and over. Just to set the record straight on my position, I expect Nintendo are doing this to 'push to the back' the idea that they have a lesser powered console, and I don't think it matters in the least that they don't have those specs available. If their machine is that seriously unpowered it shows ont he TV screen no amount of concealing specs will change that. At the end of the day it's only what's seen on screen and what people say to their friends about the machine that matters. How it works is irrelevant. And I'll stop repeating myself now.

[Rodéric]

Everyone be fair, or I'll just close that thread.

Like it or not, express your opinion just once, there's NO way to argue about opinions.

[Almasy]

Almasy, you sure you didn't mean to begin your 2nd paragraph with 'as a nintendo basher'?

oh, and next time you play a game on your 'open-spec' console don't forget to keep an eye on the performance analyzer panel on the front of the console to see how much of those flops actually get utilized at each and every moment.

pathetic.

Not a performance analizer, but at least I know at what speed my console´s CPUs and GPUs run at, what kind of polygon performance they can achieve, among other aspects. Nintendo´s machine will be inferior enough to the point that they don´t want specs to be known, and instead of being questioned suddenly they become the champions of gaming...seriously, what´s going on inside Nintendo fan´s heads??


Really? First I knew about my love for Revolution!!

Well, then you haven´t been paying attention to what yourself have written in recent Revolution discussions.

What utter crock! You've a right (depending on your national laws) to a product that does what it's supposed to do. If Rev doesn't provide fun entertaining games you can take it back to the store for a refund. There's no law AFAIK whatsoever on any country on this planet saying specs or explanations of how the technology of a device works needs to be included.

Honestly! How many of you refused to buy a DVD player because the brochure didn't list RAMDAC speeds and memory amounts? Or pin counts on the IO chip? No-one's forcing you to buy it. If you aren't comfortable buying a device without first seeing a bullet-point summary of it's contents you don't have to. For everyone else, if they like what they see on the screen that's all they need for an informed decision. You don't need to know the internal workings of a console to decide whether to buy it or not. I didn't when I bought PS2. I saw games I liked, had friends with one, so bought it long before I knew it had two VUs etc. There no legal nor natural right for me to deamand to be informed of all the inner workings (some of which may be trade secrets, though unlikely in this industry) and in most people not the slightest curiosity to know either.

Fortunately(heh) I´m not a lawyer, so I´m not very familiar on international laws, however, as a consumer, I SHOULD be able to see a console´s specs if I want to. On every product available it happens, if I want to buy a set of speakers, I want to know their power, if I´m looking for a car, the minimum I need to know is par, HP, if it´s a V4 or a V6. Even on your DVD example, a consumer should have the benefit of information concerning what kinds of outputs a DVD player has, what kinds of features and such.

It´s the same with consoles, it´s a way to provide consumers information to make an informed decision, if the consumer wishes to use that information or not is an entirely different matter. If you mindlessly got a PS2, fine, that was how you took your decision, but others might want to use more information to get one.

Bottomline is, Revolution will have a CPU and a GPU, and consumers have the right to know at least minimum specs on their capabilities, at the very, very, very least frequency of both, ammount of memory and pixel and vertex pipes. That kind of information is what we, consumers, should ask for, minimum...of course, that, as long as you are not a Nintendo fan.

[darkblu]

Ingenu, how about closing this pathetic thread?

[Almasy]

Ingenu, how about closing this pathetic thread?

Well, it would be in a better state if you didn´t bother to post such things.

[darkblu]

hmm. let's see.. what can be the state of a thread stated up by a poster who was banned 3 times from these forums for blatant fanb0ysm, and whose current thread is, surprise-surprise, only a means to allow kids with penis complexes to come out and explain how important it is that their console of choice has oh-so-big-a-dick, pardon, flop rating, and how it's their constitutional right to know the sizes of the dicks of the rest of the kids in their class.

[Almasy]

I disagree, yes, chap did initiate this discussion, but it´s worthy never the less. As a matter of fact, it´s very valuable because I´ve discovered how some people view specs, and why some are willing to blind themselves from very valuable information just to agree with their console of choice.

[fearsomepirate]

As a consumer, you have the right (or at least should) to know what lies inside of what you´re buying.

No you don't. You have the right to do everything you can to figure out what's inside once you've bought it, because it's yours (DMCA or no). But the company is under no obligation to tell you what's in there if it's not in their interest.

Knowing console specs is pretty unimportant unless you play predominantly cross-platform titles. In that case, read a couple reviews, and you'll figure out pretty quickly which one gets the best-looking version. But otherwise...that Xbox's pixel shader and DDR 400 aren't worth a hill of beans if you're into Japanese RPG's. Same goes for next gen. A whole pile of unified shaders won't be any consolation if PD0 sucks and FPS's on the Revolution are way more fun. I mean, this isn't like PC games where you have to worry if your card will run Doom 3 or not. If it has your console's logo on it, it runs. Period. Heck, that's half the appeal.

If you're just a tech geek into pissing rights over having the hottest piece of kit, you lose as soon as the next round of PC gfx cards hits, so you're better off just avoiding consoles entirely.

I should add that as a Nintendo fan, this doesn't bother me. DS and GCN were both less powerful than PSP and Xbox, respectively, and I'm not disappointed with either. I think their hardware will be satisfactory in terms of actual graphical output, and they're doing the smart thing by not focusing on a spec war they're guaranteed to lose.

[g35er]

Wouldn't the developers need to know the detailed specs for optimization? If they are in writing and distributed to developers, it will eventually leak.

[Azrael]

This is a silly move... no actually what is really silly is releasing inferior hardware later. No specs are needed. The games will reflect the power of the hardware. Games that look like they could be on the Xbox will not generate much interest outside of the Nintendo fanbase.
I am really beginning to believe that Nintendo is not interested in competing in the larger game any longer. They just want to serve their fanbase and that's it.

[Barbarian]

Most people truly don't care about specs. Look at Bose speakers, they are considered by the general public to be great, yet they don't put any actual speaker specs on the box or anywhere on their site. I think they are the only large speaker company to not post specs actually.

Yes, a lot of people base their buying decisions purely on brand. Then again, how many people do actually buy Bose? How many people buy Nintendo consoles? Do you get the connection?

And going back to the car analogy: it seems to me quite a fair comparison. HP numbers are exactly as meaningful as FLOPS. Yet, every magazine lists them, talks about them and compares them. Lets take BMW for example as a market leader in entry level luxory sedans - do you honestly believe they will be able to sell these cars if the put e measly 100hp 4cyl banger? Come on - they know these days unless you shove 6cyl 300hp monster, you better not even bother. The situation is precisely the same with consoles.

[function]

The hardware would only be inferior if it was not as good as their competitors' is at the same job. The job of Nintendo's hardware is primarily to run Nintendo's games, and with the direction they seem to be trying to follow they'll be trying to differentiate their games from those of their competitors.

In discussions like these you're in danger of being stuck between Nintendo f@nboys who refuse to accept that Nintendo don't chase the most powerful hardware possible at the time - they never have and almost certainly won't do it this time either - and Sony and MS f@nboys who are busy chasing flops and GB/s.

No, the GC isn't as powerful as the Xbox, and it wasn't supposed to be. And no, Revolution won't be as powerful as the PS3 and 360, and it isn't supposed to be either.

If Nintendo don't want to compete in terms of specs and raw hardware performance then that's fine. Good luck, and lets see if that works. Let the games do the talking - I'm looking forward to them.

[PC-Engine]

If you want to attract the non-gamer to your system, you've got to make the non-gamer trust you, and keeping obvious secrets from them isn't really the way to go about building that trust.

The non-gamer doesn't care about specs. They just care about that remote control that you can wield around to play games with nice visuals on a tv.

Well many people buy cars cause they just look good without knowing anything about how they work.

You seem to think that just because you care a lot about geeky specs, then everyone else does.

Exactly...why even bring up car analogies in the first place? Most people only care about how a car looks, price, reliability, brand, gas mileage. They don't care about hp:weight ratio, torque, redline, 0-60 times.

And going back to the car analogy: it seems to me quite a fair comparison. HP numbers are exactly as meaningful as FLOPS. Yet, every magazine lists them, talks about them and compares them. Lets take BMW for example as a market leader in entry level luxory sedans - do you honestly believe they will be able to sell these cars if the put e measly 100hp 4cyl banger? Come on - they know these days unless you shove 6cyl 300hp monster, you better not even bother. The situation is precisely the same with consoles.

Most people don't buy cars from reading specs in a car magazine. Most people go by brand, looks, price. If most people buy cars according to how much power they have, they'd all be driving 500hp cars. :lol:

[fearsomepirate]

Games that look like they could be on the Xbox will not generate much interest outside of the Nintendo fanbase.

Oh please. I highly doubt they'll release something with a crusty old 2001 GPU in it. I could be wrong. It could just be a Flipper overclocked to 200 MHz. But ATI is smart, and I'm expecting equivalent power to Radeon's X*00 series of graphics cards at the very least, especially considering they can stick those things in notebooks. Nintendo isn't paying ATI some undisclosed, large sum of money to design a slightly faster, cooler version of a graphics chip they designed back in 01.

I am really beginning to believe that Nintendo is not interested in competing in the larger game any longer. They just want to serve their fanbase and that's it.

Just like they were with ds...:roll:

[PARANOiA]

To me it seems like the only people who care about this are the kind of young lads who browse forums and quote exotic specs like RAM speed and FLOP count in order to prove their console is better than the competition.

I'll judge the Rev by the quality of the games, and the quality of the screenshots and videos. You can have the most powerful machine on the planet, but it takes a great game and talented coders to make it perform tricks, and Nintendo has both IMO.

[Azrael]

Oh please. I highly doubt they'll release something with a crusty old 2001 GPU in it. I could be wrong. It could just be a Flipper overclocked to 200 MHz. But ATI is smart, and I'm expecting equivalent power to Radeon's X*00 series of graphics cards at the very least, especially considering they can stick those things in notebooks. Nintendo isn't paying ATI some undisclosed, large sum of money to design a slightly faster, cooler version of a graphics chip they designed back in 01.



Just like they were with ds...:roll:


You underestimate many peoples lack of perception. When people can't see the difference between these first gen 360 games and Xbox games, there is evidence that a huge jump in graphical fidelity is needed before many can see a difference. This perception of last gen inferiority will only be amplified when people can compare it next to second or third gen 360 games.

[see colon]

Nintendo isn't paying ATI some undisclosed, large sum of money to design a slightly faster, cooler version of a graphics chip they designed back in 01.
of course they aren't, because ati never designed flipper. atrX did :P

specs used to be important to me. i was drunk on specs when the sega saturn was my primary gaming system. now, i still enjoy gaming on the saturn, even though it's outclassed on a technical level by all current gen consoles and some microwave ovens.

[The GameMaster]

You know... I was beginning to believe that Nintendo would likely not release any specifications on their system for a while now. Eventually though we will find out the general specifications (and likely nothing more detailed than just general specifications) as that would be leaked by third party developers, but I do not see Nintendo officially releasing specifications on their system. I can certainly understand why they wouldn't from a business point of view as that would easily be construed very negatively.

I believe we are going to be in for a long period of speculation in regards to Nintendo's next system... and I don't like that fact.

[fearsomepirate]

of course they aren't, because ati never designed flipper. atrX did :P

specs used to be important to me. i was drunk on specs when the sega saturn was my primary gaming system. now, i still enjoy gaming on the saturn, even though it's outclassed on a technical level by all current gen consoles and some microwave ovens.

And ATI bought ARTX, so they're basically working with the same people.

I only got interested in specs after I bought my GameCube and was blown away by Rogue Leader and Wind Waker. I got curious as to what was under the hood and read what I could find about it and the other consoles. I later bought an Xbox because the graphics were supposed to be in a league of their own, but other than Riddick, I didn't think they were that awesome...most of the games I bought just didn't look good to me, even though I could see that they were throwing around more bump maps, reflections, and light sources than my Cube. Finally , after finding out on anandtech that Flipper is about as powerful as a GeForce2, despite never seeing my GF2 or GF4MX spew out anything nearly as pretty as my favorite Cube games, I decided specs don't matter too much to me as long as the games have a strong prettiness factor. Then I got into retro gaming, so I'm actually more curious right now about how those bizarre machines worked.

Although in the meantime, I'm glad I learned a lot more about combiner ops, pipelines, triple buffering, stencil shadowing, and normal mapping. That's interesting stuff. It just doesn't always translate into good--or even beautiful, really--games.

[blakjedi]

Parents do ask which one is "better" and sometimes "more powerful."

[g35er]

Most people don't buy cars from reading specs in a car magazine. Most people go by brand, looks, price. If most people buy cars according to how much power they have, they'd all be driving 500hp cars. :lol:

But almost everyone I know knows the horsepower and number of cylinders of their car. They don't need to know if they have dual overhead cam, but just basic 1-2 line industry standard barometers. If the manufacturer hid it and just said, "Don't worry about it, just go drive it and see if you like it," they would surely lose some sales.

Every piece of technology has some industry barometers that they release. Cameras--Megapix, computers--Mhz, cars--HP. Have you even heard of a technology company that wouldn't release basic specs?

As I said, Devs will have to know the RAM, fill rate, Mhz, floating point and integer calc power, etc. to know how complex of a scene they can render so the specs will be out, just not officially. It'll be leaked eventually though.

edit: typos

[Azrael]

And ATI bought ARTX, so they're basically working with the same people.



Except that the engineers that designed flipper worked together under a specific design philosophy that wasn't ATI's. When ATI bought ArtX they split up the engineers into their different dev teams to work on new projects.

[london-boy]

I disagree, yes, chap did initiate this discussion, but it´s worthy never the less. As a matter of fact, it´s very valuable because I´ve discovered how some people view specs, and why some are willing to blind themselves from very valuable information just to agree with their console of choice.


Chap?!
Pakpassion is chap?

[Shifty Geezer]

Well, then you haven´t been paying attention to what yourself have written in recent Revolution discussions.I've been explaining Nintendo's actions. I've no interest in getting a Revolution myself, and I've never said I have in all the time I've been on this forum. It IS possible to agree with something without being a raving six-star :shock: :D
Fortunately(heh) I´m not a lawyer, so I´m not very familiar on international laws, however, as a consumer, I SHOULD be able to see a console´s specs if I want to. On every product available it happens, if I want to buy a set of speakers, I want to know their power, if I´m looking for a car, the minimum I need to know is par, HP, if it´s a V4 or a V6. Even on your DVD example, a consumer should have the benefit of information concerning what kinds of outputs a DVD player has, what kinds of features and such.Your talking basic componentry and features, not tech specs. Of course Revolution will come with a feature list of IO options, DVD playback, revolutionary controller. But not...
Bottomline is, Revolution will have a CPU and a GPU, and consumers have the right to know at least minimum specs on their capabilities, at the very, very, very least frequency of both, ammount of memory and pixel and vertex pipes. That kind of information is what we, consumers, should ask for, minimum...of course, that, as long as you are not a Nintendo fan.but you don't ask for this information on your DVD player or TV. You have specs like IO, connections, and trademark names like 'Photonominal Filtering' and 'Whizzmatronic Picture Enhancement' as features, but not processor speeds or memory amounts. A TV might advertise a quality feature but it doesn't say the tech specs of what's driving the technology. If you walk into a store and see two TVs from the same manufacturer, and one has 'ClearView Technology' and one hasn't, that goes to helping you make an informed decision. But you never see 'TV with 500 MHz image processor' as that information is irrelevant to the experience.

I've just looked around at a few stores and sites. None list technical specs for TVs and DVD players. Pop to Samsung and look up the Specifications tab for a DVD player, no-where does it say processor speeds or ram amounts. This information is irrelvant for the purchase. No-one buys a DVD player by comparing processor speeds. Just looked at a couple of placers that sell consoles. No-where do they list PS2's specs. Nowhere can I read PS2 has a 300 MHz CPU, 150 MHz GPU. Neither can I read XB has 700 MHz processor, nor the structural differences of those components that explain the worth of the clock speeds (because as we all know clock speeds alone are worthless and anyone choosing on clock speeds is...a moron, to be blunt!). Ah...I have just found one site. GAME (owned by Electronics Boutique I think). They don't list the GPU clockspeed for XBox though. And no vertex and pixel pipes figures for any system. I guess they're violating consumer rights, no? ;)

Now I appreciate some people want that information when choosing consoles, because they want the fastest machine. But those people wouldn't buy Revolution anyway because we all know it's not the fastest and that's why Nintendo aren't bothering to release the technical specifications (CPU and GPU speeds etc.). For everyone else, the substantial majority, just as they don't care what components go into their other CE goods, they don't care what the specs of Revolution's internal workings are. They'll buy on the appeal of demos in store in the first instance, and recommendations in the second. There's no need nor requirement amongst the general public for detailed information on internal workings, and Nintendo are not doing any wrong to the mainstream general non-geek public by not releasing this info.

[Teasy]

Oh, please, we all know you love Revolution, but nobody should defend Nintendo´s actions, which we can all agree that are done because their hardware is inferior enough to make a direct comparison a bad idea.

Yeah of course, we all know that nobody is allowed to agree with Nintendo in your opinion. Not when its so much cooler to bash everything they do...

BTW you say they may not release specs to hide the fact that Revolution won't be as powerful as the other consoles. What a load that is, everyone at Nintendo openly admits that the system won't be as powerful in every interview they do... If they don't release specs then that's just an extention of there overall philosophy, which is that specs don't matter. Why say that specs don't matter and then release a list of specs?

[Teasy]

Except that the engineers that designed flipper worked together under a specific design philosophy that wasn't ATI's. When ATI bought ArtX they split up the engineers into their different dev teams to work on new projects.

Ultimately though they were working under Nintendo's design philosophy like they are now. BTW as far as I know ATI didn't split those engineers up. Pretty much all of ArtX's engineers went into ATI's West Coast team which went on to design R3xx, R4xx and R5xx. ATI East Coast (R1xx and R2xx) designed Xenos so it makes sense that the West Coast team are designing Hollywood. Also just FYI Dave Orton of ArtX became CEO of ATI (just thought I'd throw that in with all the other ATI/ArtX info :)).

[pc999]

Just to say that releasing spec actually may be misleading (probably not in this case but) I mean imagine they released the console with a single PPE at 3,4Ghz and a X1300 at 600Mhz many would make a more informed choise thinking that the REV is more powerfull which is not. so listing the spec unless they list everything is not cleary a good thing and listing everything is a wast of time, so after all the best someone can do (for the general consumer) is say it is less/more /equal powerfull than...which they did. So realising the spec or not would be the same from their (and general consumer) point of view/bussines.

[Teasy]

BTW does anyone know how much heat GameCube's Flipper and Gekko give off (and how much total for all of GameCube's components)? Slightly off topic I know but at least its Nintendo related and I just want to know :)

[Almasy]

I've been explaining Nintendo's actions. I've no interest in getting a Revolution myself, and I've never said I have in all the time I've been on this forum. It IS possible to agree with something without being a raving six-star :shock: :D

Well, I do remember you making ridiculous comments such as "gaming is getting boring and far too complicated for me", comments that were almost unheard of in gaming forums before Nintendo´s PR/BS campaign. If it wasn´t you, I apologize.

Your talking basic componentry and features, not tech specs. Of course Revolution will come with a feature list of IO options, DVD playback, revolutionary controller. But not...
but you don't ask for this information on your DVD player or TV. You have specs like IO, connections, and trademark names like 'Photonominal Filtering' and 'Whizzmatronic Picture Enhancement' as features, but not processor speeds or memory amounts. A TV might advertise a quality feature but it doesn't say the tech specs of what's driving the technology. If you walk into a store and see two TVs from the same manufacturer, and one has 'ClearView Technology' and one hasn't, that goes to helping you make an informed decision. But you never see 'TV with 500 MHz image processor' as that information is irrelevant to the experience.

It´s relevant depending on the context. You don´t see those kinds of specs on a DVD player because requirements do not vary, differences between DVD players are not big enough to justify such a move. It´s more usefull to say what makes your DVD player unique rather than mentioning specs.

On the other hand a console has different performance capabilities when compared to their competition, so such information should be available. It´s a ground for comparison, somewhat flawed as it may be, but it is an information that can be usefull to a consumer. It´s also a part of the console´s nature, it´s not merely a DVD player with minimum technical requirements, it´s an important technological evolution over the last generation, so specs are relevant in this market regardless of Nintendo´s claims.

Nowhere can I read PS2 has a 300 MHz CPU, 150 MHz GPU. Neither can I read XB has 700 MHz processor, nor the structural differences of those components that explain the worth of the clock speeds (because as we all know clock speeds alone are worthless and anyone choosing on clock speeds is...a moron, to be blunt!). Ah...I have just found one site. GAME (owned by Electronics Boutique I think). They don't list the GPU clockspeed for XBox though. And no vertex and pixel pipes figures for any system. I guess they're violating consumer rights, no? ;)

The specs are easily available on the official site AFAIK, and can be obtained easily regardless from gaming publications. Whichever way a store decides to market the product is irrelevant.

Now I appreciate some people want that information when choosing consoles, because they want the fastest machine. But those people wouldn't buy Revolution anyway because we all know it's not the fastest and that's why Nintendo aren't bothering to release the technical specifications (CPU and GPU speeds etc.).

For everyone else, the substantial majority, just as they don't care what components go into their other CE goods, they don't care what the specs of Revolution's internal workings are. They'll buy on the appeal of demos in store in the first instance, and recommendations in the second. There's no need nor requirement amongst the general public for detailed information on internal workings, and Nintendo are not doing any wrong to the mainstream general non-geek public by not releasing this info.

That´s fine and dandy, still the company should give the customers a choice, do not withhold information from them if they do wish to know it. I suppose your arguement boils down to "if you don´t absolutely NEED to know it, then you will NOT know it, regardless of what you want" and assuring that´s fine.

Well, I disagree with that stance and I feel nobody should follow it.

[Readykilowatt]

Meh. Specs are meaningless. When I look at the specs for the PS2 and compare them to the Gamecube, the PS2 appears to be more powerful, but when I play Metroid Prime 2:Echoes (2004 GCN) and compare it to Soul Calibur 3 (2005 PS2), I know that the Gamecube is a better engineered console.

[london-boy]

Meh. Specs are meaningless. When I look at the specs for the PS2 and compare them to the Gamecube, the PS2 appears to be more powerful, but when I play Metroid Prime 2:Echoes (2004 GCN) and compare it to Soul Calibur 3 (2005 PS2), I know that the Gamecube is a better engineered console.

Shouldn't you at least compare SC2 PS2 to the GC version?

When people see games like Jak2/3 and many others, and compare them to games like RE4 on GC, they feel each console has its strengths, and they wonder what Nintendo were doing in those 18 months it took them to release the GC, because they think that there should be a much bigger difference between the two, given the time of release.

[Kanyamagufa]

BTW does anyone know how much heat GameCube's Flipper and Gekko give off (and how much total for all of GameCube's components)? Slightly off topic I know but at least its Nintendo related and I just want to know :)

The Gekko is actually a very cool running CPU, dissipating around 5W at its 485MHz operating frequency.

Where the GameCube does clearly come out on top however is in heat production and die size. The Gekko produces around 1/3 the amount of heat as the Xbox CPU and measures in at close to half of the die size.

For reference, the average temperatures for the xBox CPU are between 40º-65ºC and for the motherboard between 33º-49ºC according to some.

Dunno if that helps.

[fearsomepirate]

That´s fine and dandy, still the company should give the customers a choice, do not withhold information from them if they do wish to know it.

Unless it would hurt the company to give out that information. If you write to a sausage manufacturer and ask for a detailed breakdown of what part of the pig/cow/packing plant worker's severed hand the various bits in your sausage came from, they won't tell you. They `don't need you freaking out when you find out there are ground up eyeballs in that tasty kielbasa. They want as many people to keep eating those sausages as possible. The people who worry a lot about what's in their food are already not buying them, so they don't need to lose more customers.

Ask yourself: How would it benefit Nintendo to give the specific numbers on Revolution? You already know the numbers are lower; they've already said so. So you already know that if what you want is the most powerful machine, you're out of luck with them. How does it benefit them to tell you just how much lower those numbers are? How will that do anything but generate negative press they don't need? Will they sell more or fewer consoles if they publicly say "Oh, we've got 1/3 as many hardware threads as X360, our GPU only runs at 400 MHz, and it's only got 8 pixel pipelines and 4 vertex shaders?" They've already got a difficult PR situation trying to convince people that being able to say TFLOP isn't as important as games. They've already lost people like you. They don't need to lose the marginal cases that will change their minds when they hear "Only 1/5 as powerful as Xbox 360, look, it's only 200 MFLOP!" Heck, just saying "12-15m polygons in-game" for Cube generated a significant amount of negative buzz, as most people assumed they were overshooting their specs as much as Sony was.

You know it's not as powerful. You know they're not currently shooting for HD. What else do you need to know? If you're preordering based on power alone, you know not to buy the Revolution.

[see colon]

If you write to a sausage manufacturer and ask for a detailed breakdown of what part of the pig/cow/packing plant worker's severed hand the various bits in your sausage came from, they won't tell you. They `don't need you freaking out when you find out there are ground up eyeballs in that tasty kielbasa. They want as many people to keep eating those sausages as possible. The people who worry a lot about what's in their food are already not buying them, so they don't need to lose more customers.
ingredients lists are a good analogy. how many people know what half of the ingredients are in pre-packaged foods. even ones that sound "safe", like mechanicly seperated chicken, or partially defatted cooked pork fatty tissue.

there's a decent portion of the gaming population that still believe that the xbox and ps2 are cutting edge technology. but if you ask them what's in them to make them cutting edge they have no idea. they just know they've seen pretty images on a tv screen while playing them.

overhyping your specs, even if you're not outright lying, can be dangerous. look at what happened to nVidia with the geforce FX. yes, the 5800 could technicaly be considered an 8 pipeline card, and yes, it could technicaly run pixel shaders beyond the ps2.0 specification, and yes it was manufactured using cutting edge fab technology and ran at clock speeds much faster than the competition. but it all adds up to the card underperforming in real life situations.

[Li Mu Bai]

What is the point in arguing/debating this? These statements run in direct contradicton to what Miyamoto said. Regarding after the hw was finialized & they saw how things were "up & running" (real-time gaming scenarios) would he reveal the specs to the consumer. Anyone can "crunch numbers" (theoretical ones) on a calculator, but this is "misleading." Why are all of you so concerned anyways? The numbers will leak via benchmarks, developer quotes, etc. B3D will get its pound of flesh, rest assured. Probably even before the system lauches. While I don't necessarily agree with it, I do see the logic behind it. No one wants to see a repeat of the DC debacle. A console crushed by the mere promises of vastly exaggerated power.

I will wait on E3, to actually see how the games look & control firsthand. Everyone is overlooking the fact that on a standard or p-scan TV Nintendo has stated that "You won't be able to tell the difference." This speaks much more to me than not revealing specs publicly, which we all know will come. Especially here.

[fearsomepirate]

I will wait on E3, to actually see how the games look & control firsthand. Everyone is overlooking the fact that on a standard or p-scan TV Nintendo has stated that "You won't be able to tell the difference." This speaks much more to me than not revealing specs publicly, which we all know will come. Especially here.

That's another pretty good point. They don't need to put out numbers that sound vastly inferior ("Why should I pay $200 for a Dreamcast that puts out 2m polys per second when I can pay $300 for a PS2 that puts out 66m polys per second?). They need to keep reiterating "Our numbers may be as big, but on your average TV, our graphics will look nearly indistinguishable." Now they do need make good on that promise, but it does keep them from getting absolutely spanked by MS and Sony TFLOP hype. "Oh sure, our games will look as good as Gears of War and Ghost Recon 2, just in 480p instead of 720p." No matter how big Sony's numbers get or how many bar graphs MS puts out, they can just keep saying that same thing (and hurrying back to the lab to tweak the design a bit more :wink:).

One advantage Nintendo has is that they know what kind of images their console has to be able to output, because MS has already demonstrated so much of what XGPU Strikes Back can do. If they can get there with lower specs than you'd think you need, so much the better for them.

[Li Mu Bai]

They need to keep reiterating "Our numbers may be as big, but on your average TV, our graphics will look nearly indistinguishable." Now they do need make good on that promise, but it does keep them from getting absolutely spanked by MS and Sony TFLOP hype.

I completely agree. Because most of the world, including NA, will not have HDTVs by this time. Though Nintendo's claims must be true, the average mainstream consumer will not care about resolutions their TVs cannot reproduce, & the controller interface is set to be a huge Revolution selling point given the pre-requisite software, & there are always the various shells. Avoiding a hypothetical stat fight, no matter how capable Broadway & Hollywood are, is an intelligent move at this point. The public's power perception, even if you are no techie, can be fatal. Let the Revolution's game's visuals, art assets, animation, etc. speak for themselves.

[Almasy]

Unless it would hurt the company to give out that information. If you write to a sausage manufacturer and ask for a detailed breakdown of what part of the pig/cow/packing plant worker's severed hand the various bits in your sausage came from, they won't tell you. They `don't need you freaking out when you find out there are ground up eyeballs in that tasty kielbasa. They want as many people to keep eating those sausages as possible. The people who worry a lot about what's in their food are already not buying them, so they don't need to lose more customers.


That´s just a tad exagerated don´t you think? I believe basic information such as clock frequencies and Pixel and vertex pipes should be available for everyone, but heh, what do I know?

[mckmas8808]

I completely agree. Because most of the world, including NA, will not have HDTVs by this time. Though Nintendo's claims must be true, the average mainstream consumer will not care about resolutions their TVs cannot reproduce

Well actually most people in the US in 2008 will have HDTVs.

[Alpha_Spartan]

Nintendo: "Baby, it's not the size of the boat...it's the motion of the ocean. But just to be safe, I'll keep my pants on and we can just dry hump."

[Shifty Geezer]

That´s just a tad exagerated don´t you think? I believe basic information such as clock frequencies and Pixel and vertex pipes should be available for everyone, but heh, what do I know?But that information is misleading. Like when people popped into a PC store and saw 350 MHz AMD processor PCs next to 400 MHz Intel processor PCs and thus decided the Intel was better. Would a comparison of the number of shader pipes between PS3 and XB360 really give an indication of relative performance? Xenos works very differently so direct number comparisons are useless. Without know the WHOLE architecture you can't compare. A few paper specs will just be misleading. PS3 has 2x the System bandwidth than XB360. Hence PS3 is 2x better!

Hell, we've been discussing for months the advantages and disadvantages of different architectures at different clock speeds, and no-one here can agree on how these systems compare. Partial information is often more damaging than no information, and it's better people don't know anything at all than a few specs they don't understand but can compare based on relationships with numbers rather than relationships with system architectures.

[darkblu]

But that information is misleading. Like when people popped into a PC store and saw 350 MHz AMD processor PCs next to 400 MHz Intel processor PCs and thus decided the Intel was better. Would a comparison of the number of shader pipes between PS3 and XB360 really give an indication of relative performance? Xenos works very differently so direct number comparisons are useless. Without know the WHOLE architecture you can't compare. A few paper specs will just be misleading. PS3 has 2x the System bandwidth than XB360. Hence PS3 is 2x better!

Hell, we've been discussing for months the advantages and disadvantages of different architectures at different clock speeds, and no-one here can agree on how these systems compare. Partial information is often more damaging than no information, and it's better people don't know anything at all than a few specs they don't understand but can compare based on relationships with numbers rather than relationships with system architectures.


no-no-no-no, Shifty, you got that completely wrong - you disregard basic information. now let's get back to the dry humping.

[Teasy]

Nintendo: "Baby, it's not the size of the boat...it's the motion of the ocean. But just to be safe, I'll keep my pants on and we can just dry hump."

Bad analogy, its more like:

Nintendo: "I'm not going to tell you my cock measurements, they're not important, now lets get down to business and I'll show you what is important ;)"

[Azrael]

Ultimately though they were working under Nintendo's design philosophy like they are now. BTW as far as I know ATI didn't split those engineers up. Pretty much all of ArtX's engineers went into ATI's West Coast team which went on to design R3xx, R4xx and R5xx. ATI East Coast (R1xx and R2xx) designed Xenos so it makes sense that the West Coast team are designing Hollywood. Also just FYI Dave Orton of ArtX became CEO of ATI (just thought I'd throw that in with all the other ATI/ArtX info :)).

They split the engineers up about equally into both teams. I doubt Nintendo had much to do with Flippers design beyond giving them a price/performance estimate.

I will add that ATI aquiring the ArtX IP has very likely benefited their ability to make streamlined custom designed architectures such as the 360 and probably the Revolution.

[LunchBox]

Nintendo: "Baby, it's not the size of the boat...it's the motion of the ocean. But just to be safe, I'll keep my pants on and we can just dry hump."

roflmao!!!

can i use it as a sig???

[fearsomepirate]

Well actually most people in the US in 2008 will have HDTVs.

Are you sure? If the price of HD sets doesn't come down in a major way, people won't buy them. If it comes down to buying a $50 signal converter for your old box (assuming that the cable companies won't provide analog signals anymore) or a $2000 television, a lot of people will keep their old sets. Also, expect a lot of cheaper sets to only display in 480p. The government mandate is for digital broadcasting, not 720p and higher.

Nevermind the issue of the government trying to control the marketplace like this. If they let well enough alone, we'd eventually switch over as HDTV's came down in price and more and more broadcasting was done in HD.

[mckmas8808]

Are you sure? If the price of HD sets doesn't come down in a major way, people won't buy them. If it comes down to buying a $50 signal converter for your old box (assuming that the cable companies won't provide analog signals anymore) or a $2000 television, a lot of people will keep their old sets. Also, expect a lot of cheaper sets to only display in 480p. The government mandate is for digital broadcasting, not 720p and higher.

Nevermind the issue of the government trying to control the marketplace like this. If they let well enough alone, we'd eventually switch over as HDTV's came down in price and more and more broadcasting was done in HD.

Keep in mind I'm no Ms. Cleo. Hell Ms. Cleo is no Ms. Cleo.:wink: What I'm I talking about? Oh yeah I got that information for the CEA which was reported on IGN.

Sales of HD televisions are already on the rise and analog standard definition sets on the decline. While only 12.5 percent of U.S. households own an HD set now, the Consumer Electronics Association forecasts that the number is going to steadily increase. In 2006, by the time PlayStation 3 and Revolution launch, nearly 30 percent of all homes in America will have an HDTV. That's already a significant audience, but it gets bigger. In 2007, almost 50 percent of all U.S. households will own an HDTV and in 2008, a whopping 68.1 percent, according to the CEA.

Here (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/624/624517p3.html)

[Almasy]

But that information is misleading. Like when people popped into a PC store and saw 350 MHz AMD processor PCs next to 400 MHz Intel processor PCs and thus decided the Intel was better. Would a comparison of the number of shader pipes between PS3 and XB360 really give an indication of relative performance? Xenos works very differently so direct number comparisons are useless. Without know the WHOLE architecture you can't compare. A few paper specs will just be misleading. PS3 has 2x the System bandwidth than XB360. Hence PS3 is 2x better!

Hell, we've been discussing for months the advantages and disadvantages of different architectures at different clock speeds, and no-one here can agree on how these systems compare. Partial information is often more damaging than no information, and it's better people don't know anything at all than a few specs they don't understand but can compare based on relationships with numbers rather than relationships with system architectures.

Look, I understand the drawbacks, such as misunderstood numbers among other things. However, I prefer that situation to given no information at all. If risk of misinterpretation is an important enough reason to withhold information from the public, hell, we wouldn´t know anything about anything at all. I don´t and cannot agree with your interpretation of this, let alone fathom how you can defend this.

People should have access to this information and given the oportunity to try to understand it, rather than acting condescending in this respect. And look, if Nintendo worries so much that publically releasing will deteriorate the machine´s appeal, then that means either of two things: Nintendo did not market the product appropriately, or their new machine simply isn´t appealing enough to make people get past technical details.

Look, If people really are getting enormously bored and Nintendo will really come to save us all and make our lives complete, then a little hurdle such as "not as good" specs won´t stand in their way to the gaming revolution we all oh so need, right?

[fearsomepirate]

People should have access to this information and given the oportunity to try to understand it, rather than acting condescending in this respect.

I can safely say that the number of people who take Nintendo's reluctance to publish a spec sheet personally is rather small compared to their target audience. It's not like they made much of anything public with DS other than ARM9 and ARM7 processors with likely some level of customization. No one seems to care that you pretty much are out of luck if you want to know what bitrate it plays back sound at, how many voices its midi synth can handle, how much L1 cache it has, etc. Here you go, here are the officially released DS hardware specs on nintendo.com:

CPUs: One ARM9 and one ARM7
Color: Capable of displaying 260,000 colors
Sound: Stereo speakers providing virtual surround sound
Screens: 256x192 pixel resolution and .24 mm dot pitch

You can get a little more detail if you hunt for it...a couple clock speeds and the amount of RAM, but nothing about cache sizes, geometry engines, vector processing capabilities, texturing units, or anything like that. That's just not much, no one is offended, sales of software and hardware remain strong, and Advance Wars is still a kickass game you can't get on PSP. I'd expect about the same level of detail about the Revo specs once they're ready to release them.

Look, If people really are getting enormously bored and Nintendo will really come to save us all and make our lives complete, then a little hurdle such as "not as good" specs won´t stand in their way to the gaming revolution we all oh so need, right?

Right, which is why they're apparently not planning to release detailed specs for a detailed Anandtech writeup that lots of geeks will read, then go back to their X360's and ueber-1337 gaming rigs to play the latest FPS. I mean, why bother catering to people who aren't going to buy your system? And how much do you need to know? There's all kinds of stuff Sony and MS aren't telling you. You keep saying you need to know enough to know which is most powerful. Well, Nintendo has already told you theirs is the least powerful, so why are you still upset? You take it as a personal insult? Ageia hasn't told much of anyone how their PPU works, and I don't hear crying from consumers. All I hear is "oh man I want a physics processor!"

No one's under obligations to disclose the inner workings of their inventions and machines to anyone else. You know, kind of like how you probably have no idea how a cam phaser works, but it won't stop you from buying a new car.

[PC-Engine]

Ageia hasn't told much of anyone how their PPU works, and I don't hear crying from consumers. All I hear is "oh man I want a physics processor!

:twisted:

[Ty]

Well the difference though is that Ageia is the only real offering (or will be) in the consumer space but Revolution will be competing against the PS3 & XBox360.

If Ageia was competing against some peers, then specs would definitely be wondered about by us here.

Not saying anyone should play the specs game, it's really personal choice.

Disclaimer - I once worked with 2 programmers who are now at Ageia and hopefully one hooks me up with a card!

[Li Mu Bai]

I mean, why bother catering to people who aren't going to buy your system?

I somewhat see your point, as techies & wanna-be-techies will simply go for the most technologically advanced platform, regurgitating new industry buzz words they don't even fully understand. But there are also Nintendo afficionados like myself that would like to see comprehensively what's under the hood. I've become keenly interested with Nintendo's next home platform architecture, ever since the innovative & efficient GC's debuted. Well, what's known of the Revolution's specs., comprehensive or not, will definitely leak here.

[Teasy]

They split the engineers up about equally into both teams. I doubt Nintendo had much to do with Flippers design beyond giving them a price/performance estimate.

How do you know that the ArtX team was spread evenly between both ATI teams? Because everything I've heard suggests otherwise.

Also you're greatly underestimating the level of input Nintendo has in the design of its own console. They aren't the kind of company who just give someone else a job to do and let them get on with it :) Obviously ArtX will have done the large majority of the actual design but Nintendo will have been there all the way through telling ArtX what they wanted and what they didn't want.

[london-boy]

Are you sure? If the price of HD sets doesn't come down in a major way, people won't buy them. If it comes down to buying a $50 signal converter for your old box (assuming that the cable companies won't provide analog signals anymore) or a $2000 television, a lot of people will keep their old sets. Also, expect a lot of cheaper sets to only display in 480p. The government mandate is for digital broadcasting, not 720p and higher.

Nevermind the issue of the government trying to control the marketplace like this. If they let well enough alone, we'd eventually switch over as HDTV's came down in price and more and more broadcasting was done in HD.



You do know that these days only the top of the range HDTVs cost in the region of thousands of dollars, right. Much like the "top of the range" of everything else. I mean, there are DVD players that cost 2000 dollars, that doesn't mean that DVD players are expensive by nature. Quite the opposite in fact.

You can get a HDTV for very little money these days, everything considered, especially in the US!!

[darkblu]

You do know that these days only the top of the range HDTVs cost in the region of thousands of dollars, right. Much like the "top of the range" of everything else. I mean, there are DVD players that cost 2000 dollars, that doesn't mean that DVD players are expensive by nature. Quite the opposite in fact.

You can get a HDTV for very little money these days, everything considered, especially in the US!!

in canada you can't get a decent size HDTV for much less than 2k CAD. whereas my 27" SD costed me 370 CAD, and the state-of-the-art SDs of this size do not go much higher than 500. if we take desktop flat panels as any indication of the market temps, i don't expect HDTVs to enter the consumer's sweet spot pricerange for the next 2 years.

[fearsomepirate]

You can get a HDTV for very little money these days, everything considered, especially in the US!!

The only thing I can find remotely in my price range is a 26" widescreen HDTV for $350. 26" widescreen is just not that big (I currently have 24" SD) considering I can get a 32" SD with progressive scan for about the same price. Maybe that HDTV will be $200 in a few years, not that I'll be in the market for a new TV.

I should add that someone said no one's ever recommended a game with terrible graphics based on gameplay. In that case, I recommend Katamari Damacy and Animal Crossing.

[london-boy]

The only thing I can find remotely in my price range is a 26" widescreen HDTV for $350. 26" widescreen is just not that big (I currently have 24" SD) considering I can get a 32" SD with progressive scan for about the same price. Maybe that HDTV will be $200 in a few years, not that I'll be in the market for a new TV.



Well if you're just not interested in buying a new TV, then don't you think your opinion in this matter doesn't really matter much?

People buying new TVs will surely have different budgets, but a $500 budget is really "normal", going up from there. In the circumstances, one will prefer to buy something that will last him for a loooong time, especially if he doesn't feel he will need another TV within 5 years or so.

People who only upgrade every 10 years will put aside a bigger amount of money, and go for a TV that will last them 10 years. A HDTV is the only way to go for those people.

Obviously different people have different needs. However it is undeniable that HDTV prices are coming down fast and have already come down fast, and will continue to do so.

[ban25]

Are you sure? If the price of HD sets doesn't come down in a major way, people won't buy them. If it comes down to buying a $50 signal converter for your old box (assuming that the cable companies won't provide analog signals anymore) or a $2000 television, a lot of people will keep their old sets. Also, expect a lot of cheaper sets to only display in 480p. The government mandate is for digital broadcasting, not 720p and higher.


$2000? A 32" Sharp AQUOS sells for $1500 and smaller models can be had for under a grand.

[fearsomepirate]

Well if you're just not interested in buying a new TV, then don't you think your opinion in this matter doesn't really matter much?

Only if there are a lot of people like me, and lots of those people are potential customers for video game consoles. I really have no concept of how often people buy new TVs, how many TVs are sold per year, what the median and mean prices are, what the standard deviation is, etc. We had the same TV for around 10 years at my parents' house. I'm not saying that HDTV's won't be common in a few years, but I'm not convinced they will be at this point, either. What about Europe and Japan?

[london-boy]

Only if there are a lot of people like me, and lots of those people are potential customers for video game consoles. I really have no concept of how often people buy new TVs, how many TVs are sold per year, what the median and mean prices are, what the standard deviation is, etc. We had the same TV for around 10 years at my parents' house. I'm not saying that HDTV's won't be common in a few years, but I'm not convinced they will be at this point, either. What about Europe and Japan?


In Europe there has been a VERY sudden spike in HD information and sales.
Basically what happened here is that the HD standard was finalised "properly" only a few months ago. This made it possible to have HD-Ready TVs that are explicitily recognisable in shops. That's very important because this way people see what they're buying, they see big HD-Ready logos and ask what HD is all about.
Here there are some very strict rules, a HD-Ready TV is required to support at least 720p, have HDMI and component and support all its resolutions at both 50Hz and 60Hz.
These very defined lines make it possible to have a "standard" and makes it much easier for people to know what they're buying.
they don't need to know about HDMI or HDCP or other technicalities, they only need to know that their set is HD-Ready and that makes it work with SkyHD which will launch next year, and all other HD broadcasts that will come out later on.

Incidentally, prices have come down BIG TIME. Now in the UK it is possible to get HDTVs for about £600 from 26" up which is about half the price of widescreen TVs when they were "the big thing". Obviously there are much cheaper CRT SD televisions, but they'll be phased out eventually and replaced by LCD screens, even non-HD ones that are cheap due to the lack of proper connections, but will work ok, much like "normal TV's" today.

Now, going into electrics stores, it is undeniable people will know what HDTV is, and it won't take very long till every set sold will be HD-Ready.

[Li Mu Bai]

LB, like most people in the UK own 60hz pro-scan TVs? The price is dropping, but not so fast as many assert, esp. outside of NA. Also show me a standalone $2000 DVD player.

the Consumer Electronics Association forecasts that the number is going to steadily increase. In 2006, by the time PlayStation 3 and Revolution launch, nearly 30 percent of all homes in America will have an HDTV. That's already a significant audience, but it gets bigger. In 2007, almost 50 percent of all U.S. households will own an HDTV and in 2008, a whopping 68.1 percent, according to the CEA.

This is what is known as a forecast, a prediction. This is by no means an actual accurate adoption rate %, there are too many other economic variables to consider such as potential tax increases, employment rates, rising costs of goods such as oil for example, etc, etc. A plethora of factors could slow consumer adoption, & let's not blindly believe that these various organizations have been correct when attempting to do the very same thing with other technology sectors in the past.

Also, we don't for certain what the Rev has in store architecturally. As I've said previously, a "high-def" mode similar to Polyphony's 1080i GT4 should be easily attainable, we simply don't know at this point in time.

[london-boy]

LB, like most people in the UK own 60hz pro-scan TVs? The price is dropping, but not so fast as many assert, esp. outside of NA. Also show me a standalone $2000 DVD player.
.

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displayreview.php?reviewid=5443

£3500 = $7000 in February 2005. Don't think it got much cheaper, and if it did, there's a long way to go to get to $2000...

I did say "the top of the top of the range". Just to show that there ARE DVD players that are ridiculously expensive.

In the US, prices are stagnant because they're already damn low, everything considered.

In Europe they have a long way to go before they are "mainstream" priced. So here they are dropping fast, considering.