Revolution increases competitions sales?

[Shifty Geezer]

I think Nintendo are being dumb, just to make the console small. They throw away graphics.

Do you actually have technical details on Revolution's graphics perforamnce, or are you just going by hearsay?

We only have a few unofficial subjective comments about Rev's graphics, and no qualification of what they mean. Inferior? Inferior how? Resolution? We know that much, and 90% of gamers are on SDTV and won't notice.

Before saying Nintendo have 'thrown away graphics' isn't it better to actually wait and see what graphics solution they have? A cheaper, adequate GPU isn't as fancy as a top-end GPU, but it does the job almost as well at a much lower premium. 'inferior' to ultra-fantastic can still be fantastic. We've debated this before, considering what 'penalty' Nintendo may take for running a smaller box, and it's very inconclusive.

 

[Farid]

Nintendos most important feature will be their "revolution"stuff, what difference their innovation will make for games, if the controller is something that enhances game experience and makes it "more fun"...

True, but I'm also sure that the graphics will be good enough.
I mean even if they opt for the worst case scenario a X800 Mobility class GPU, it would be powerfull enough to boast excellent graphics in 480p.

Logically if the GPU has Mosys eDRAM then most likely NEC will have some part in the fabbing.

Since it's very unlikely to see Nintendo include the Flipper in Revolution (For board space reasons only, without even talking about cost), therefore the GPU will either have at least a pool of 3MB very fast VRAM, or more logically it'll boast some eDRAM.

But how much eDRAM, and will it be split into two pools like on the Flipper, one for the textures and one for the framebuffers. We can be sure that it won't be 3MB, or else it will be used for emulating the GC only.

The CPU will most definitely be based on a variant of the PPC ISA for backwards compatibility so logically IBM will be the one fabbing that part. I doubt Nintendo will go back to a MIPS architecture of old, however if they do then NEC would be a good candidate to fab that version.

I think we can forget about CPU ISA change, seeing the numerous hints about the fact that the Rev devkits being close to the GC ones. That and the IBM deal, of course.

 

[Squeak]

And not being obligated to run on anything but 480p should save a lot of fillrate and bandwidth, making it realistic to get similar IQ except of course WRT to sharpness.

 

[Fafalada]

And not being obligated to run on anything but 480p should save a lot of fillrate and bandwidth

I think bandwith is a non-issue - 480P makes a chip with eDram much more likely (and it would help with GC compatibility). Also you need about 3x less shaderpower for comparable shader output to that of X360 at 720P, so there should be plenty of space for eDram on chip.

As for CPU, I'm hoping for an OOOE PPC chip in there myself, for one it would give a nice unique flair to the machine, and it would be funny seeing comments about Nintendo machine being easiest to work with of the 3... Especially after all the GP procesing pimping MSs did ...

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Anyone noticed Revolution isn't the definitive name for Nintendo's next home console?

Nintendo's North American press office has Revolution listed as:

Release Name
2006 Revolution (unofficial title)

IMO, at this moment it is still unclear wether their will be a loss, gain, status quo for Nintendo on the home console market. Specification-wise, very little is known (Broadway and Hollywood are yet to be revealed), and still some people dismiss it as being an inferior console because of the size and some not yet 100% clear information on Revolution's output signals (yeah no HD-TV, but is that everything we can know?).

Nintendo has yet to reveal the most important part of the console, the controller, has only confirmed a few titles and one partner (in contrast to Microsoft and Sony, they still have to announce their entire line-up, marketing plans,...)

I would say, too early to tell wether Nintendo will lost/win/status-quo any marketshare, with implications for Sony/Microsoft. I wouldn't underestimate the fact that Revolution will be backwards compatible with NES, SNES, N64 and GameCube, but we don't know about pricing, available titles, partners,... (Although I do know Nintendo's Revolution would be a true killer when they would also offer all Sega, NEC and SNK titles. One can dream, no? ).

Let's just wait and see, plus get rid of all that 'Nintendo is doomed' thinking. When we know everything, you can start telling that story again.

 

[cthellis42]

I know everything, and Nintendo is doomed.

...duh!

 

[pc999]

I had not read all the post in the thread, but lets suposse that Rev will really be less powerfull, but (and I think will go with nitendo philosophy) easy to devolop and bring that revolution controler that can bring a lot of small dev full of ideas but without cash to the others consoles.

We all love games that are simply good, even with "bad" gfx for me they will be simply playing with others games not the big name games (out of nitendo).

I dont know if I had been explicity enough, but I dont think that a cheap, tiny and full of good games (even if not good gfx) console, is a bad thing.

They dont need to go directely against to MS and Sony, just like handheld dont go against MS.

 

[NavNucST3]

Ok, I am confused, I keep hearing everyone say that no one owns an HDTV. Well then if that is N's stance why even go for 480p, is it just so when you downsample you get AA? Because you can't just magically get 480p on an SDTV.

As far as increasing sales, I'm pretty sure if you look at Nintendos console numbers over the years they have lost sales every generation, I don't see that changing now.

I think it is hard to judge how "powerful" it will be, reading the comments from the x360 prod. design team, they wanted to make the 360 smaller, but ran into heat issues; the room saved by ditching drives leaves room for hefty hsf configs so it could be pretty "powerful"

I for one could care less about BC, its nice, but as an HDTV owner its all about HD gaming and no DAMN jaggies. I'm not sure if I would buy the Rev for whatever price, there would have to be at least 20 games that I would play that I couldn't get on the other consoles, and it would have to pass the gate keepers test (read: wife.....4 year, anniversary yesterday).

 

[Farid]

Ok, I am confused, I keep hearing everyone say that no one owns an HDTV.

The rumor saying that the Revolution will only output at 480i was only that, a rumor. It was hardly believable seeing that the FCC deadline for the SDTV to HDTV transition, in the US, is stated for 2009.
In other words, in the middle of the generation. Nintendo couldn't have a non progressive signal compliant machine on the market. It would be stupid.

Well then if that is N's stance why even go for 480p, is it just so when you downsample you get AA? Because you can't just magically get 480p on an SDTV.

Most actual console games render their back buffers in 480p and then output a 480i signal (for the SDTVs).

 

[NavNucST3]

Ok, I am confused, I keep hearing everyone say that no one owns an HDTV.

The rumor saying that the Revolution will only output at 480i was only that, a rumor. It was hardly believable seeing that the FCC deadline for the SDTV to HDTV transition, in the US, is stated for 2009.
In other words, in the middle of the generation. Nintendo couldn't have a non progressive signal compliant machine on the market. It would be stupid.

Well then if that is N's stance why even go for 480p, is it just so when you downsample you get AA? Because you can't just magically get 480p on an SDTV.

Most actual console games render their back buffers in 480p and then output a 480i signal (for the SDTVs).

You are correct our analog will be gone on Jan 1, 2009 (none to soon for me)
So if Rev launches Xmas 2006, they essentially only have a 2 year grace period here (USA), which again begs the question of, "Why not do HD?"

Staying On-Topic though, I'm not sure how well the Rev will sell, I just think N is going to take a larger loss on this gen, than they have ever experienced. I don't think they will fold, but I do think big loss.

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Ok, I am confused, I keep hearing everyone say that no one owns an HDTV.

The rumor saying that the Revolution will only output at 480i was only that, a rumor. It was hardly believable seeing that the FCC deadline for the SDTV to HDTV transition, in the US, is stated for 2009.
In other words, in the middle of the generation. Nintendo couldn't have a non progressive signal compliant machine on the market. It would be stupid.

Well then if that is N's stance why even go for 480p, is it just so when you downsample you get AA? Because you can't just magically get 480p on an SDTV.

Most actual console games render their back buffers in 480p and then output a 480i signal (for the SDTVs).

You are correct our analog will be gone on Jan 1, 2009 (none to soon for me)
So if Rev launches Xmas 2006, they essentially only have a 2 year grace period here (USA), which again begs the question of, "Why not do HD?"

Staying On-Topic though, I'm not sure how well the Rev will sell, I just think N is going to take a larger loss on this gen, than they have ever experienced. I don't think they will fold, but I do think big loss.

A larger loss than... a sizeable profit? Woa!

Again, too early to tell, even speculation can only tell so much...

 

[NavNucST3]

A larger loss than... a sizeable profit? Woa!

Again, too early to tell, even speculation can only tell so much...

Let me clarify, loss in-terms of user base, which after awhile does hit the pocketbook. I mean, you have to sell your machine to someone, right?

 

[Evil_Cloud]

A larger loss than... a sizeable profit? Woa!

Again, too early to tell, even speculation can only tell so much...

Let me clarify, loss in-terms of user base, which after awhile does hit the pocketbook. I mean, you have to sell your machine to someone, right?

IF they were to lose a chunk of their userbase during the next-generation that is. Nintendo has a solid user base (and manages to get additional appeal from other demographics as well).

Really, we can only speculate/discuss on a possible loss/gain/... when we know what demographics they're targeting with what kind of marketing plans/pricing/features/games/...

 

[NavNucST3]

IF they were to lose a chunk of their userbase during the next-generation that is. Nintendo has a solid user base (and manages to get additional appeal from other demographics as well).

Really, we can only speculate/discuss on a possible loss/gain/... when we know what demographics they're targeting with what kind of marketing plans/pricing/features/games/...

Agreed.

 

[Powderkeg]

I think Nintendo are being dumb, just to make the console small. They throw away graphics.

Do you actually have technical details on Revolution's graphics perforamnce, or are you just going by hearsay?

We only have a few unofficial subjective comments about Rev's graphics, and no qualification of what they mean. Inferior? Inferior how? Resolution? We know that much, and 90% of gamers are on SDTV and won't notice.

Before saying Nintendo have 'thrown away graphics' isn't it better to actually wait and see what graphics solution they have? A cheaper, adequate GPU isn't as fancy as a top-end GPU, but it does the job almost as well at a much lower premium. 'inferior' to ultra-fantastic can still be fantastic. We've debated this before, considering what 'penalty' Nintendo may take for running a smaller box, and it's very inconclusive.

I don't have technical detail about their specific GPU, but I do have quite a bit of familiarity with GPU's in general, and the Revolution's size will restrict it to the equivelent of laptop GPU's, rather than desktop GPU's. There simply isn't enough room in the case for a really powerful GPU and the heat it would produce.

 

[Powderkeg]

IF they were to lose a chunk of their userbase during the next-generation that is. Nintendo has a solid user base (and manages to get additional appeal from other demographics as well).

Really, we can only speculate/discuss on a possible loss/gain/... when we know what demographics they're targeting with what kind of marketing plans/pricing/features/games/...

They've lost 20-30% of their userabse with each new generation since the NES.

I see nothing that indicates that trend will reverse itself, do you?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Before saying Nintendo have 'thrown away graphics' isn't it better to actually wait and see what graphics solution they have? A cheaper, adequate GPU isn't as fancy as a top-end GPU, but it does the job almost as well at a much lower premium. 'inferior' to ultra-fantastic can still be fantastic. We've debated this before, considering what 'penalty' Nintendo may take for running a smaller box, and it's very inconclusive.

I don't have technical detail about their specific GPU, but I do have quite a bit of familiarity with GPU's in general, and the Revolution's size will restrict it to the equivelent of laptop GPU's, rather than desktop GPU's. There simply isn't enough room in the case for a really powerful GPU and the heat it would produce.

It's quite likely that Revolution's graphics processing will be less powerful than it's competitors, (though a possible process shrink would even them up on the size aspect) but my point is that though inferior it may not be 'thrown away'. They could still achieve fanatastic looking visuals on less powerful hardware.

So really before saying 'Arrgh, Nintendo are releasing a console with naffy graphics next to XB360 and PS3! They're DOOMED!" we wait to consider the impact of Nintendo's GPU solution when we know what level of visuals it'll output.

PS2 is vastly inferior to XB in GPU terms, but to the average Joe there's not a great deal to differentiate between them. An X800 in a closed system would provide good enough visuals for Joe Public not to notice much difference between Rev and XB2 or PS3 - the only obvious disparit we know of is the clarity of HD for those lucky enough to support it.

 

[Ruariâ„¢]

Do you think Revolution will be powerful enough to run the 3rd party PS3 and 360 titles. So that people can buy a Revolution to be able to play the range of games they want (including the 3rd party ones). Or do you think it will be like Cube, with some of the big games on the other consoles. Making it like Cube, more of a secondary console. This is me saying it unbias as a Nintendo fan.

Don't bash me.

 

[Farid]

Do you think Revolution will be powerful enough to run the 3rd party PS3 and 360 titles.

Nobody, who isn't NDAed 10xtimes, can answer this question.
We're still in the pure speculation phase.

Personally, I think that the GPU won't be a problem, seeing how it's meant to render at 480p only.

If there's a problem with multiplatform ports, this problem will be CPU related, I think. Iwata made clear in recent statements that the others consoles (X360, PS3) had too complex CPUs, and thus were hard to develop for. Which could lead us to believe that the Revolution could boast a single core CPU, or at best a dual core and it's probably OoOE.

 

[PC-Engine]

Whatever configuration the CPU will take, it will be well balanced with respect to the GPU just like GCN.