Could this anonymous informant be 100% correct? (Revolution)

Shifty Geezer said:
How much does power gyration need? They've had it in GB haven't they? And a Google finding Analogue Devices has gyros as tiddly little chips (http://www.analog.com/en/cat/0,2878,764,00.html) that at 5v, 6 mA, draw 30 mWatts of power - hardly power hungry.

Well, i thought we'd be talking about 3 axis high precision gyration devices, since it'd be used as a control scheme rather than a gimmick
 
Surely it wouldn't be a problem if the controllers used decent rechargable lithium ion batteries though. Which I assume all wireless controllers will use if the console actually requires them or comes with them in the box.
 
Three of these Analogue Devices efforts should do fine. I don't work with such tech but these things are used in acrobatic robots and the like, so they obviously work.
 
Li Mu Bai said:
scificube said:
I agree these rumors don't speak to accuracy as far as I can tell.

I disputed at length the credibility of those system specs a long while ago over on the GCNGB at IGN.

I still dispute them.

Those specs where pure speculation with no point of logical derivation to validate them at their introduction or up to this point.

Gyroscopic controllers will require that each controller actually be two separate objects due to the fact that as humans we cannot rotate our wrists in the same plane along the same plane with respect to the horizontal orientation. We must rely on elbow movement primarily for that. The other issue is really precision itself that will be hard to duplicate.

I don't see that gyros would be good thing for anything requiring quick reflexes and navigation. i.e. FPS ala Half Life3 or Ninja Gaiden: Wrist Breaker!

HD-DVD or Blue Ray is complete up to Nintendo's whim. That's pretty much all anyone could assert unless they had actual specs which no one apparently has.

At this point I would dispute G5s or a Dual core G5 being used.

Dispute them based upon what exactly? Contrary speculation? Why dispute G5s or a dual core G5? I'm curious, as we know who's providing the Revolution's Cpu. So Nintendo invested in Gyration tech. so that their future implementation in a controller interface would be virtually unplayable? :rolleyes: Precision can be duplicated, they've had about 4.5 years to work that out if they were indeed going to include this aspect. I understand that we have little hard information to operate off of, but those that have the dev. kits to both have at least commented on comparative power. Why would logic be necessary to validate a possible early spec. sheet? :?:

I apologize for the slow response. It's funny life seems to grant me some attention nowadays.

I dispute G5s because they are too big, to hot, and feature capabilities that a console needs not.

I would imagine Nintendo would not abandon better specialization and not go the MS route and toss in some off the shelf parts.

I also posted a thread on this board which has my theory as to what I feel the Revs CPU could end up being like. I feel the CPU will use PPE like cores (architecturally not in specific implementation as MS and Nintendo have different needs).

G5s are not especially cheap either and when things aren't cheap Nintendo either doesn't use them or alters them significantly.

-----------------------------------------

I am aware that Nintendo has invested in gryos some time ago. It is not clear whether they've been working on the tech over all this time. That has been a speculation but alls fair I suppose.

Precision will be an issue with gyration controllers due to the structure of our bodies. Our phalanges are much more precise than our wrists. It will be very difficult to calibrate such devices to our limited control and range of motion along the horizontal plane as I already noted. I noted two keen instances where a lack of precision will be detrimental. I am not making a argument against the sensitivity of gryos. I am noting that we will have difficulty regardless.

If you think you could play RE4, Ninja Gaiden, Unreal Tournament2004, etc with a gyroscopic controller then you are entitled to do so. It is my opinion though that playing games such as these would be inhibited by gyroscopic control.

I did not think about force feedback and if they could be put them to task there that would be kewl enough.

As for the comments to comparative power. I did not dispute this. I disputed what form that power would be in. I am also still hesitant to believe such statements are fully true as no one has finalized hardware yet and for all we know the console makers themselves are still making decisions especially in the case of Nintendo.

I'm not just trying to dump on Nintendo if that is what you think. I happen to a fan (!= fanboy) of them. Scifi and Cube happens to comprise my current online identity. It's not all that imaginative but it's easy to guess what tangles up my synapses. I don't pretend to be within light years as intelligent, experienced or talented as some to the people that frequent this forum but I have thought about the next gen a good deal. I'm not just pulling stuff out of the air...or am I?

Did what I say really make your eyes roll? I think that's the first time that's happened...I am now one with the intraweb :p
 
I dispute G5s because they are too big, to hot, and feature capabilities that a console needs not.

I must agree with you regarding the G5's superflous features, although heat dissipation is a Nintendo forte. MS has been able to compensate as well. I was curious as to what exactly you're reasoning was. Was that rhyme unintentional?

I would imagine Nintendo would not abandon better specialization and not go the MS route and toss in some off the shelf parts.

I agree with Nintendo in all likelihood adopting a more specific gaming-centric processor configuration. But you're overlooking the fact that the GC utilized a PPC 750CXE, albeit with an extended 40 instruction SIMD set. Also I would hardly classify the XBX 360's central processor as anything resembling an "off the shelf" unmodified G5. Far from it my friend.

I also posted a thread on this board which has my theory as to what I feel the Revs CPU could end up being like. I feel the CPU will use PPE like cores (architecturally not in specific implementation as MS and Nintendo have different needs).

I will read it.

G5s are not especially cheap either and when things aren't cheap Nintendo either doesn't use them or alters them significantly.

I wonder how IBM won that contract then. They were competing against both Intel & AMD iirc, & got a generous deal. Could you provide me with an example of significant Cpu alteration by Nintendo?

-----------------------------------------

I am aware that Nintendo has invested in gryos some time ago. It is not clear whether they've been working on the tech over all this time. That has been a speculation but alls fair I suppose.

Much surronding the Revolution's specifics is speculation right now. But to invest in a company without refining, or having solid evidence that this technology is indeed usable & implementable is sheer folly. Nintendo is not about the business of wasting money.

Precision will be an issue with gyration controllers due to the structure of our bodies. Our phalanges are much more precise than our wrists. It will be very difficult to calibrate such devices to our limited control and range of motion along the horizontal plane as I already noted. I noted two keen instances where a lack of precision will be detrimental. I am not making a argument against the sensitivity of gryos. I am noting that we will have difficulty regardless.

Gyration Inc. appears to have a contrary opinion. Although we still do not know with certainty exactly how the gyroscopic control will fit into the interface.

If you think you could play RE4, Ninja Gaiden, Unreal Tournament2004, etc with a gyroscopic controller then you are entitled to do so. It is my opinion though that playing games such as these would be inhibited by gyroscopic control.

Again, opnions are not factual representatives. It remains to be seen if this type of control would hinder control or accuracy. We may, or may not get this answer come May.

I did not think about force feedback and if they could be put them to task there that would be kewl enough.

I agree.

As for the comments to comparative power. I did not dispute this. I disputed what form that power would be in. I am also still hesitant to believe such statements are fully true as no one has finalized hardware yet and for all we know the console makers themselves are still making decisions especially in the case of Nintendo.

Yes, but there is something to be ascertained by development kits. I would imagine that the XBX 360's specs. are all but finalized. Given its launch window date & numerous software is already up & playable. Iwata confirmed that the Revolution is not, but would be soon. I would also guess that the studios were compairing raw or estimated output?

I'm not just trying to dump on Nintendo if that is what you think. I happen to a fan (!= ) of them. Scifi and Cube happens to comprise my current online identity. It's not all that imaginative but it's easy to guess what tangles up my synapses. I don't pretend to be within light years as intelligent, experienced or talented as some to the people that frequent this forum but I have thought about the next gen a good deal. I'm not just pulling stuff out of the air...or am I?

Perhaps I misread your intent initially, as you didn't give supporting reasons behind your opinions.

Did what I say really make your eyes roll? I think that's the first time that's happened...I am now one with the intraweb

I thought I was dealing with yet another Nintendo troll, my sincerest apologies good sir. ;) _________________
 
Li Mu Bai said:
I wonder how IBM won that contract then. They were competing against both Intel & AMD iirc, & got a generous deal. Could you provide me with an example of significant Cpu alteration by Nintendo?

Simple. Blood oath. They sold their souls to the Devil. That's the only explanation, seen how they are in all 3 competing consoles in one single generation. :devilish:
 
london-boy said:
Li Mu Bai said:
I wonder how IBM won that contract then. They were competing against both Intel & AMD iirc, & got a generous deal. Could you provide me with an example of significant Cpu alteration by Nintendo?

Simple. Blood oath. They sold their souls to the Devil. That's the only explanation, seen how they are in all 3 competing consoles in one single generation. :devilish:

lb, didn't they allude to offering "soft deals" to platform manufacturers to offset the expense of their supercomputers?
 
Li Mu Bai said:
london-boy said:
Li Mu Bai said:
I wonder how IBM won that contract then. They were competing against both Intel & AMD iirc, & got a generous deal. Could you provide me with an example of significant Cpu alteration by Nintendo?

Simple. Blood oath. They sold their souls to the Devil. That's the only explanation, seen how they are in all 3 competing consoles in one single generation. :devilish:

lb, didn't they allude to offering "soft deals" to platform manufacturers to offset the expense of their supercomputers?

Hey i was kidding!
I'm sure they offered a lot in terms of cost to technology ratio. Or else, at least one of the 3 competitors would have gone somewhere else.
 
Nintendo = already use IBM
Sony = wanted custom chip and I guess IBM were the best choice given supercomputer work?
MS = could have gone anywhere - Intel, AMD, IBM. Perhaps IBM offered best price/multi-processor option.

I don't think IBM gaining the console CPU space exclusively shows anything amazing. They only really had to win MS over and Ninty and Sony were already their friends.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Nintendo = already use IBM
Sony = wanted custom chip and I guess IBM were the best choice given supercomputer work?
MS = could have gone anywhere - Intel, AMD, IBM. Perhaps IBM offered best price/multi-processor option.

I don't think IBM gaining the console CPU space exclusively shows anything amazing. They only really had to win MS over and Ninty and Sony were already their friends.


Whatever the reasons, IBM are in a very, very, VERY nice situation now and in the coming 7+ years.
 
london-boy said:
Shifty Geezer said:
Nintendo = already use IBM
Sony = wanted custom chip and I guess IBM were the best choice given supercomputer work?
MS = could have gone anywhere - Intel, AMD, IBM. Perhaps IBM offered best price/multi-processor option.

I don't think IBM gaining the console CPU space exclusively shows anything amazing. They only really had to win MS over and Ninty and Sony were already their friends.


Whatever the reasons, IBM are in a very, very, VERY nice situation now and in the coming 7+ years.

Indeed, forget buying the next-gen consoles and buy IBM's stock instead. 8)
 
Back
Top