Nintendo confirms low price and no Hi Def for Revolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZoinKs!

Regular
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.
 
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?
 
I don't have an HDTV, but the omission of HD support is a kick in the balls. There's no getting around it.
 
Blade said:
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.
 
Vysez said:
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.
 
Vysez said:
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...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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".
 
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.
 
wco81 said:
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.
 
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....
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.

Blade said:
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.
 
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
 
mr_arcam said:
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.
 
mr_arcam said:
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.

Skrying said:
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. :(
 
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 .
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top