Merrick: Revolution Specs probably will never be released

[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 Geezer]

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. 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 Geezer]

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 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 ). 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. 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...