[ZoinKs!]

Didn't see this posted yet and figured it deserves it's own thread. No real surprises for us and it's not specific about price. But it's from an official source rather then just rumors and speculation.

CNN article

"Value has been a key card for us this generation and we'll continue to play it," Fils-Aime told me. "Do I expect us to be at a lower price point than our competition? Yes I do. Have we determined a price yet? No we haven't."

"What we'll offer in terms of gameplay and approachability will more than make up for the lack of HD," he said.

[Farid]

Wasn't that already understood? With their "All-Access Gaming" Motto and all...
Back since E3 they said that they'll be cheaper, more affordable, than the PS3/X360.

BTW, and OT, but did Nintendo already said what controller(s) will be include in all the boxes?

[Blade]

I don't have an HDTV, but the omission of HD support is a kick in the balls. There's no getting around it.

[Farid]

Originally Posted by Blade

I don't have an HDTV, but the omission of HD support is a kick in the balls. There's no getting around it.

It has to be framebuffer eDRAM related, or else there's no reason for them to say that it won't defintely not support HDTV resolutions.

[ZoinKs!]

Originally Posted by Vysez

Wasn't that already understood? With their "All-Access Gaming" Motto and all...
Back since E3 they said that they'll be cheaper, more affordable, than the PS3/X360.

Sure, it was understood which is why I said "no real surprises." But it's official confirmation of it and also shows they're not changing on the high def issue.

BTW, and OT, but did Nintendo already said what controller(s) will be include in all the boxes?

That's not really off topic because the article mentions the subject. There's some other tidbits in there, too.

...will the Revolution ship with any of the auxiliary devices for the controller, a motion-sensitive unit that looks like a TV remote control? (Playing action titles, for instance, could almost demand a second device to facilitate movement in the game.) The answer? To be determined. "A lot of that will be driven by our first party games," said Fils-Aime.

[pc999]

Originally Posted by Vysez

It has to be framebuffer eDRAM related, or else there's no reason for them to say that it won't defintely not support HDTV resolutions.

Looking at this if they do 480p [Ed] with AA they should be able to do 720p without AA, I doubt if anyone would want but dev still would have that option...

[wireframe]

Ballsy move. It may not please the spec junkies, but if this was madated through a business vision, rather than a lack of resources and ability (hardly), I can only think that Nintendo may have seen a new tomorrow. Let's hope they don't completely alienate their current fans while making the rest of the World ones.

Personally, I have a difficult time imagining the price as the sticking point for the market. Rather, I think these devices have to become more multi-purpose to find their way into every home. In a sense, I think it has to become "and they play games.." rather than "they only play games." To me, the obvious is Internet/E-mail, movies and music, with Internet being a very broad subject. To be very clear, I don't mean multi-player online games. I mean it as a universal entertainment and information device. In this sense, I think Kutaragi has it right (if he ever really said it, I have only read it on here) that the Playstation will seek to replace the PC. Perhaps not for your word processor and spreadsheet, but certainly as your Internet communication device and forget about buying stand-alone DVD players.

It follows, naturally, that HDTV is a key component in such an evolution. Just try reading a web page on a SDTV and you will see why.

PS. In this sense, I think Apple may be well suited to compete. They would not need the most powerful gaming system, but they seem to know how to do "the rest".

[Blade]

Do I smell an unprecedented Apple/Nintendo merger/collaboration?

[wco81]

First it was not going optical media. Then it was online. Now it's HD.

In each instance, Nintendo is choosing to forego advances in technology, particularly technology which is undergoing widespread adoption.

Not just by its competitors in the console business but in other electronics/computer markets.

They've stayed profitable, mainly through first-party games and portables. But they are justly seen as catering to the kiddie demographic, hence market-share limited. They tried to get games which are more adult, such as the deal for the RE series, as well as Eternal Darkness, a "darker" Zelda, etc.

But their main demographic is graduating to more "adult" systems.

[Hardknock]

Originally Posted by wco81

First it was not going optical media. Then it was online. Now it's HD.

In each instance, Nintendo is choosing to forego advances in technology, particularly technology which is undergoing widespread adoption.

Not just by its competitors in the console business but in other electronics/computer markets.

This is completely different because they are offering something substantial in it's place. Something their competitors are not offering. So it's a give and take. I don't mind the DS's inferior visuals because of the new gameplay experiences it provides. And that is ultimately what matters.

[mr_arcam]

There is another way to look at it. If they choose not to use HD resolutions they will potentially have more available performance for graphical effects and such. The amount of performance they will gain from fill rate and such will make it interesting when comparing the overall gaming experience to PS3 and XBOX 360.

If anyone remebers the N64, it had a very low resolution but it ended up providing a visual experience that in most occasions looked better than psx.

Just food for thought....

[seismologist]

It's ok as long as they support 16x9 and progressive scan.

[Skrying]

Less resolution for more effects? I see that happening. I see them being able to show off a ton of awesome effects, some neither Sony or MS could do.

I think Nintendo may get a little bit of the market back this time around. Not a lot, but I think this console will sell much better than the Gamecube.

[Deepak]

I think N could just be meaning that HD won't be standard but dev could make an HD game if they want. It does not mean Rev cannot output HD games. But it is really BAD marketing on N's part to say that Rev won't have HD. They could have said that Rev will be HD enabled/ready like you have those HDTV ready/enabled sets.

Am I right?

[Inane_Dork]

Some think of the Rev as doing 480p better than the X360 or PS3 can do 720p. I do not understand that at all.

As for why no HD, maybe it cut down on the number of chips and ports. And maybe if they pushed the Rev into 720p (for ports, I'd guess), the graphics would look degraded even to the lay person.

Originally Posted by Blade

Do I smell an unprecedented Apple/Nintendo merger/collaboration?

If you mean "unprecedented" as in "hasn't happened before," yes.
If you mean it as "unanticipated," no, as you obviously are anticipating it.

IMO, Apple and Nintendo are two of the most headstrong and independent companies in the tech sector. Any merger or collaboration between the two would be a disaster for both.

[jvd]

Some think of the Rev as doing 480p better than the X360 or PS3 can do 720p. I do not understand that at all.

Its not doing 480p better than the other 2 do 720p. Its that 480p is a third of the pixels which requires a third of the power .

So nintendo can show up with a third of the xbox 360s power and output graphics at 480p that is on par with 720p xbox 360 videos .

I highly doubt 1/3rd thep ower but a good 60-75% of the power should allow it to have ports of xbox 360 and ps3 games with the only hit to image quality being 480p . They may even be able to add more fsaa on 480p

[Fox5]

Originally Posted by mr_arcam

There is another way to look at it. If they choose not to use HD resolutions they will potentially have more available performance for graphical effects and such. The amount of performance they will gain from fill rate and such will make it interesting when comparing the overall gaming experience to PS3 and XBOX 360.

If anyone remebers the N64, it had a very low resolution but it ended up providing a visual experience that in most occasions looked better than psx.

Just food for thought....

PSX and N64 were the same resolution though, and I think N64 had more hires (640x480) games than PSX did.

[Ty]

Originally Posted by mr_arcam

If anyone remebers the N64, it had a very low resolution but it ended up providing a visual experience that in most occasions looked better than psx.

Well was the N64 that much cheaper than its competition? I don't believe so (but I'm not sure so ...)

In other words, you can't (relative to your competitors) magically have:

Cheap
Powerful
Close launch dates
Small

All in one tidy package.

Originally Posted by Skrying

I think Nintendo may get a little bit of the market back this time around. Not a lot, but I think this console will sell much better than the Gamecube.

I totally believe Nintendo will do quite a bit better than the GCN, which really did sell quite poorly.

[jvd]

Well was the N64 that much cheaper than its competition? I don't believe so (but I'm not sure so ...)

In other words, you can't (relative to your competitors) magically have:

Cheap
Powerful
Close launch dates
Small

All in one tidy package.

the n64 came out what almost 2 years after and was at 200$ which i believe is what the psone and saturn were at .

THe psone and saturn kept droping in price. However the n64 did have the graphical edge. But the cost of games were alot due to the carts.


I really think if the n64 was cd based it would have taken a much bigger share of the market. Mabye around 50m units instead of the 30ish it was able to do. The cost of the games(70ish usd) kept me away from it as i was only in highschool and that was alot to drop on a game .

[Skrying]

I think Nintendo can have though:

Cheap
Easily useable power
Close launch dates
Small size

I think the Revolution will once again be extremely easy to develop for, and this time hopefully Nintendo will honestly make an effort to get 3rd party support. Honestly if Nintendo can help 3rd party dev's with the Rev's controller and useful features then I believe they could do much much much better this time around.

[Ty]

Originally Posted by Skrying

I think Nintendo can have though:

Cheap
Easily useable power
Close launch dates
Small size

Then MS and Sony (and their partners) have fools for engineers.

[wco81]

Nintendo is going to concentrate on new game mechanics with that controller. Not only does the controller and sensors take up more of the budget which could have been used for graphics silicon, the games developers will be working on supporting the controller, not pushing the envelope graphics-wise.

What does high-res and better textures do for Mario? Not a whole lot because the style is for simpler edges and flat colors with little light shading. Was the Mario in Sunshine that much more detailed than the Mario in Mario 64? Maybe the lack of visual difference accounted partly for Sunshine not seeming to sell as well as Mario 64 did.

[MrWibble]

Originally Posted by jvd

Its not doing 480p better than the other 2 do 720p. Its that 480p is a third of the pixels which requires a third of the power .

So nintendo can show up with a third of the xbox 360s power and output graphics at 480p that is on par with 720p xbox 360 videos .

I highly doubt 1/3rd thep ower but a good 60-75% of the power should allow it to have ports of xbox 360 and ps3 games with the only hit to image quality being 480p . They may even be able to add more fsaa on 480p

Assuming the shortfall in power is only down to fillrate and the really really expensive CPUs that MS and Sony developed are basically sitting idle for much of the frame and not doing any physics, AI, deformation, animation...

Personally I'm far more interested to know what the Rev CPU is capable of than the GPU.

Also, given that the last survey indicated that most people would be buying the Rev as a 2nd console rather than their only console, and assuming that the other two really are more powerful (does anyone think they won't be?) then why would ports be particularly interesting anyway?

If I buy a Rev it'll be for the exclusives.

[Magnum PI]

Originally Posted by MrWibble

Also, given that the last survey indicated that most people would be buying the Rev as a 2nd console rather than their only console.

which survey ?

[wireframe]

I'll also add that for me, as a non-hardcore console gamer (but working on it), the rumor of being able to play and easily acquire (Internet?) the Nintendo back catalogue for Revolution would be a very strong driver for purchasing one. This single idea overshadows HDTV by miles. For the most part I just want games to be fun. I like to examine them for their technical "WOWEEEEE" factor (technical term), but to get hooked you need good games and good games don't necessarily require HDTV. In fact, I would say that games are what require HDTV the least, with other functions, like Internet/e-mail, being the main draw of this feature.

This rumor, or is it a promise, sounds a bit too good to be true, but if Nintendo come through with that I think they will be facing a race to buy their console. I figure most of those older games are rather small in size too, so it won't be a day long download to acquire them. Sounds like it could be a lot of fun.