Nintendo e3 thread 2
- Thread starter jvd
- Start date
- Status
quest55720
Regular
I still don't see any argument that can be made for nintendo showing NEXT GEN specs. If the anounced today it would of gotten lost in the wash of Sony's hype machine. If they anounce at a later date they can have the spotlight to themselves. Look at MS they got rocked monday by Sony and thier hype machine. Nintendo also is in a war with sony over the handheld market. Fighting off the PSP at this time and date is more important than some NEXT GEN launch 18 months from now. Nintendo should be pushing thier current stuff that will put money into thier pockets right now. I know profits are over rated on the internet but squeazing another profitable year out of the GC would be huge. Going up against the sony hype machine is like getting in the ring with Ali in his prime. You are just going to be trash talked humiliated and KOed infront of the world just ask sega and MS. I guarentee the rev will be much more embraced anounced at a latter time and date with out PS3 hype in thier face.
Geeforcer said:
i feel strange at first but now I feel it may be a very wise choice. (except from marketing point of view)
if revolution supply 16:9 and very good quality of 480p. It may allow the revolution is be a lot less powerful compared to the other two (the 3 times gamecube talk). the ATI GPU, may includes some very amazing features that will no no see in the other two.
just like dvds, some very high quality DVD still looks very well when comapre to HDTVs
Geeforcer said:
but what if nintendo work with ati with about 4 yrs (just like the other two) and found out that pushing up resolution may not be the only way to make better quality images?
i got a 720p pj but my wife still can't figure out some films she watched is actually HDTV.
>> I know a lot of developers who don't like HDTV as a requirement. <<
Sure. But if it was all about what developers liked, PS2 would have fizzled before it was launched. Requiring HDTV support ensures that developers don't get lazy because "most people don't have HDTVs/can't tell the difference anyway".
On another note, the following was published on IGN on 5/12: "According to recent information, Revolution will also be able to play high-definition games and regularly go online."
So which one is it?
Sure. But if it was all about what developers liked, PS2 would have fizzled before it was launched. Requiring HDTV support ensures that developers don't get lazy because "most people don't have HDTVs/can't tell the difference anyway".
On another note, the following was published on IGN on 5/12: "According to recent information, Revolution will also be able to play high-definition games and regularly go online."
So which one is it?
ERP said:
By the time these consoles are halfway through their lifespan, many millions of the most ardent gameplayers in the US and Japan with the most disposable income will have HDTV. I don't know about Europe, but here and in Japan, it is very important.
In the overall picture of "good looking", resolution plays a part (especially on *large screens*), as does anti-aliasing. A game could have the greatest global illumination photoreal rendering in the world, but if it was a sparkly and pixelated as the PS/2, it would destroy most of the beauty.
To not mandate 720p IMHO would be a grave mistake. I understand devs want to use fillrate elsewhere, but gamers generally want to run their games in higher resolution.
Khronus said:I'm gonna take a wild guess at Revolution's specs:
Dual Core Power PC approx 2.2ghz
ATI VPU 450 mhz with 10MB EDRAM
PPU (hey I can hope and it would be revolutionary)
512MB MoSys 1T-SRAM
DSP for sound, possibly integrated into the VPU ala "Flipper"
512MB Flash ROM
Integrated wireless nic
..
They will not put a 1yr old chip in Revolution. They will go at least 3.2ghz Dual core Power PC. Remember it's the same company, and if IBM can do 3.2 ghz triple core, they can just as well do a dual core.
Speng
How do you think Revolution's size would compare to this:
http://alienware.com/product_detail...e=PC-LT-AREA51-M-7700&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT
If you took out the:
1. Screen
2. Hard Drive
3. Battery
4. Keyboard
5. Internal speakers
? Anything else?
I think if you did that, you would be left with a system that isn't much larger than Revolution is, but which sure as hell offers more than "2-3 times" GC performance. Delay that to next year, and you should be able to get something approaching Xbox 360 in specs, even if it can't beat it.
http://alienware.com/product_detail...e=PC-LT-AREA51-M-7700&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT
If you took out the:
1. Screen
2. Hard Drive
3. Battery
4. Keyboard
5. Internal speakers
? Anything else?
I think if you did that, you would be left with a system that isn't much larger than Revolution is, but which sure as hell offers more than "2-3 times" GC performance. Delay that to next year, and you should be able to get something approaching Xbox 360 in specs, even if it can't beat it.
Going back a page or two...
I see no reason for Nintendo to want or need to outstrip PS3 or Xbox360 in hardware power. This clearly isn't the company's focus. They're catering to a different type of gamer - call it the "Nintendo" gamer - who's going to buy an Xbox or PS for his (or her) "power" fix and also buy Revolution for the first-party games.
And Nintendo feels quite confident it can put out quality software without having the most teraflops and pixel shaders. Besides, they seem committed to the low end - the younger crowd - so launching with a $300 console really doesn't make much sense.
Nintendo, being Nintendo, is once again marching to the beat of its own drummer. I think it should be apparent by now that the company is headed in a different direction than MS or Sony.
I see no reason for Nintendo to want or need to outstrip PS3 or Xbox360 in hardware power. This clearly isn't the company's focus. They're catering to a different type of gamer - call it the "Nintendo" gamer - who's going to buy an Xbox or PS for his (or her) "power" fix and also buy Revolution for the first-party games.
And Nintendo feels quite confident it can put out quality software without having the most teraflops and pixel shaders. Besides, they seem committed to the low end - the younger crowd - so launching with a $300 console really doesn't make much sense.
Nintendo, being Nintendo, is once again marching to the beat of its own drummer. I think it should be apparent by now that the company is headed in a different direction than MS or Sony.
quest55720
Regular
Natoma said:holy crap that Gameboy Micro looks hot! And I LOVE the retro NES controller look.
I love it also if they can get it priced at under 50 bucks it could be a big seller. I know if they get it under 50 bucks ill be getting it for my nieces and nefews this christmas.
quest55720 said:Natoma said:holy crap that Gameboy Micro looks hot! And I LOVE the retro NES controller look.
I love it also if they can get it priced at under 50 bucks it could be a big seller. I know if they get it under 50 bucks ill be getting it for my nieces and nefews this christmas.
Yea jvd told me on IM that it's gunna retail for $50. If it plays MP3s as well, this is going to sell like nuts, particularly in comparison to the psp.
I know I'll be getting one. I didn't get the SP because I didn't like the smaller design. My hands are rather large. The original GBA was perfect for me. This design would definitely find itself in my pocket upon release.
- Status
Similar threads
