Revolution increases competitions sales?

[Shifty Geezer]

Making it like Cube, more of a secondary console. This is me saying it unbias as a Nintendo fan.

Nintendo are talking about not going head-to-head with MS+Sony, and broadening gameplay, and new simple gaming methods...

I think they aren't interested in running the Maddens, GTAs, etc. of the others. I think they want 3rd party devs to develop Revolution-centric games for their platform, not cross-platform. As Rev will be cheaper, I think's it's positioned ot be the second console in every home if Nintendo can mange to provide some interface that really does appeal to everyone, leaving sport+fps+ravers to MS+Sony and Nintendo own style games, whatever that might be, on Revolution.

 

[Powderkeg]

Making it like Cube, more of a secondary console. This is me saying it unbias as a Nintendo fan.

Nintendo are talking about not going head-to-head with MS+Sony, and broadening gameplay, and new simple gaming methods...

I think they aren't interested in running the Maddens, GTAs, etc. of the others. I think they want 3rd party devs to develop Revolution-centric games for their platform, not cross-platform.

The problem with that is that Nintendo owners don't buy many 3rd party games. Intentionally making your system less appealing to 3rd party developers while not being able to sell 3rd party games on your existing system is a very bad move if you are wanting to increase sales or 3rd party support.


More and more, Nintendo is making choices that will turn their console into something no one but a hardcore Nintendo fan would want.

 

[Fox5]

Nintendo may have a chance if they go different plus cheaper.

The DS is unique enough that many people may want to try it, and gives good enough results for many people at a rather acceptable price. A sub $200 console with good enough graphics that gives a unique experience may do ok, the DS is doing great in Japan and it seems that's where Nintendo has been focusing their efforts since the launch of GameCube.(after the rather American focused N64 which bombed just about everywhere else)

 

[Almasy]

Comparisons to DS are extremely faulty, due to one fact: Nintendo owned completely the handheld market before DS/PSP showed up and had 100% of all third party support.

It´s an extremely different position than the one Nintendo is in the console market. They are not in a position important enough to decide in what direction the market will go, nor their third party sales are good enough to attract other developers to follow them.

IMO, Nintendo is trying to isolate themselves by finding a new audience where they can once again get ahold of a steady stream of profit and where the majority of the titles sold are published by themselves.

 

[Powderkeg]

Nintendo may have a chance if they go different plus cheaper.

The Gamecube is both different and cheaper.

If the Revolution is nothing more than Gamecube 2, then why should we expect consumers to treat it differently than they do the Gamecube?

The DS is unique enough that many people may want to try it, and gives good enough results for many people at a rather acceptable price. A sub $200 console with good enough graphics that gives a unique experience may do ok, the DS is doing great in Japan and it seems that's where Nintendo has been focusing their efforts since the launch of GameCube.(after the rather American focused N64 which bombed just about everywhere else)

If Nintendo's plan is to focus on the smallest of the 3 major regions, and the only region where the gaming market is in severe decline, then they are in deep trouble.

 

[Fox5]

Nintendo may have a chance if they go different plus cheaper.

The Gamecube is both different and cheaper.

If the Revolution is nothing more than Gamecube 2, then why should we expect consumers to treat it differently than they do the Gamecube?

The DS is unique enough that many people may want to try it, and gives good enough results for many people at a rather acceptable price. A sub $200 console with good enough graphics that gives a unique experience may do ok, the DS is doing great in Japan and it seems that's where Nintendo has been focusing their efforts since the launch of GameCube.(after the rather American focused N64 which bombed just about everywhere else)

If Nintendo's plan is to focus on the smallest of the 3 major regions, and the only region where the gaming market is in severe decline, then they are in deep trouble.

Gamecube is different? How so? It has maybe 1 or 2 odd ball games that might require a gimmicky controller, but so do PS2 and Xbox. Gamecube seems just cheaper to me, game selection is different but the overall experience isn't. Xbox and PS2 are just as capable.
On the other hand, the DS's touch screen(and I guess the microphone as well) is something that can't be duplicated by any controller on any other system apart from a PDA, and offers an experience that can't be duplicated. On the consoles, anyone can make a Mario clone, they may even make it better, but any of the games that make extensive use of the DS's touch screen(beyond using it as an analog joystick emulator) just can't be done on other systems. That, and the touch screen is a heck of a lot more precise than a thumbstick.

If Nintendo's plan is to focus on the smallest of the 3 major regions, and the only region where the gaming market is in severe decline, then they are in deep trouble.

Yep, but it does look like that's how they're focusing. Might be interesting if video games died out in Japan and Nintendo succeeded in replacing them with toys, which are what video games started out as anyhow.
If Nintendo really wanted to sell a lot of units, they should integrate the GBA into a stylish cell phone, seems like just about everyone in Japan would buy it, and cell phone gaming would finally have the software needed to make it take off.
On a vaguely related note, that's sort of why PC gaming is dieing(what was it, down to <$400 million from $1.2 billion 2 years ago?), the hardware is fine but the software just isn't there to sell.

 

[Powderkeg]

Gamecube is different? How so? It has maybe 1 or 2 odd ball games that might require a gimmicky controller, but so do PS2 and Xbox. Gamecube seems just cheaper to me, game selection is different but the overall experience isn't. Xbox and PS2 are just as capable.

The Gamecube is different from the PS2 and Xbox because of it's size, design, intent, portability, and normally goofy Nintendo controller.

On the other hand, the DS's touch screen(and I guess the microphone as well) is something that can't be duplicated by any controller on any other system apart from a PDA, and offers an experience that can't be duplicated. On the consoles, anyone can make a Mario clone, they may even make it better, but any of the games that make extensive use of the DS's touch screen(beyond using it as an analog joystick emulator) just can't be done on other systems. That, and the touch screen is a heck of a lot more precise than a thumbstick.

So are you trying to say the Revolutions controller will be a touch screen?

:?

Touch screens work fine on handhelds, because you are looking at your hands while playing anyways. When you play consoles though, you look at your TV screen, which means you'll be essentially playing blind if you have to use a touch screen for a controller.

And it still won't help Nintendo. Nintendo already has the image of a cheap, quirky system that's only made for 1st party games. If the Revolution's big claim to fame is just another cheap system with another quirky controller, it's only going to run off even more 3rd party support, and solidify the publics option that the Nintendo is a niche system that you only buy if you can't live without Nintendo games.



If Nintendo want's to increase console sales, they need to embrace the mainstream audience and mainstream games. Everything they do these days seems to indicate they are going in the opposite direction.

 

[blakjedi]

I heard, a newish PC monitor can handle up to 720p. Iwata in the past said Revolution could connect to PC monitor. So when you take into account the amount of homes with access to an HD screen (pc monitor) then also take into account that by 2008 stanard tv's will be totally fazed out. Only HD TV sold. This happening early in Revolutions' life span. Then the whole arguement of there not being enough HD TV screens out there to merit supporting 720p is silly.

Television will be DIGITAL but not necessarily HD.

 

[Readykilowatt]

Revolution increases competitions sales?

No.

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

Yes. The N64, Dreamcast and Gamecube were all pretty huge.

 

[_leech_]

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?

I think it's safe to assume it will be underpowered if they're shooting for 480p. If the Revolution is technically capable of supporting HDTV resolutions, why not do it? It'd be a new low if Nintendo were to purposely spend the time to disable something the console could do from the start.

 

[Readykilowatt]

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?

I think it's safe to assume it will be underpowered if they're shooting for 480p.

Assumptions? The Gamecube was released after the PS2 and not only was it more powerful, it was smaller. So I'll assume that the Revolution will be more powerful than the Xbox360.

If the Revolution is technically capable of supporting HDTV resolutions, why not do it?

So what if it doesn't support HDTV? Most people do not base their gaming purchases on resolution.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

We had this argument before when no HD was announced, and then I was taking your viewpoint. But the reason not to support HD isn't neccessarily GPU requirements but output. They'd need an DVI connector and other gubbins for something that only a small percentage of people will benefit from. Whereas writing to 480p you guarentee everyone can see the output, devs don't need to worry about different resolutions, Nintendo save a few bucks per console probably, and most people will be none the wiser.

A powerful GPU capable of supporting 720p can manage better AA at 480p and need less resources. Less eDRAM and no tile rendering for example could see the backbuffer directly accessible from the main GPU core for processing.

All in all it's quite possible Revolution won't look 'really bad' by comparison. The only case that might not be true is in a store where XB360 and PS3 are showing on HDTVs in extra clarity.

 

[_leech_]

Whereas writing to 480p you guarentee everyone can see the output...

I couldn't, my TV doesn't support progressive scan

 

[Npl]

All in all it's quite possible Revolution won't look 'really bad' by comparison. The only case that might not be true is in a store where XB360 and PS3 are showing on HDTVs in extra clarity.

Yes, but for how long?
Theres no Reason for me to go out now and buy a HDTV, there are no HD-Feeds in Europe, no HD-Movies, nothing (and besides HDTV is 16:9 Cripplescreen).
Next year we both get a few HDTV-Feeds and HDTV-Hardware, so I expect a wave of (rich) early Adopters will get HDTVs, and maybe in 2-3 Years HDTVs will be affordable for anyone and get quite common. Seeing HDTV-Content in Stores will immensely boost the desire for it.

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Revolution increases competitions sales?

No.

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

Yes. The N64, Dreamcast and Gamecube were all pretty huge.

In fact, I think N64 would be pretty close, if not identical in size to Revolution if you were to take away the four plastic 'legs', the RAM expansion 'bump', and were to put the internals into another case.

Yeah, PS3 and Xbox 360 are bigger, but look at GameCube this generation and compare it to Xbox.

 

[_leech_]

(and besides HDTV is 16:9 Cripplescreen)

This has to be the most uneducated comment i've seen yet...

 

[Xenus]

Ah but in the US it is different. I saw a 27" 4:3 CRT HDTV with a DVI input for $294 but then according to their website and the manufacturers website the product does not exist so it could have been just a mislabel. Anyways other than that I have seen are 27" HDTVs are in the $350 range in the US advertisements.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yes, but for how long?
Next year we both get a few HDTV-Feeds and HDTV-Hardware, so I expect a wave of (rich) early Adopters will get HDTVs, and maybe in 2-3 Years HDTVs will be affordable for anyone and get quite common. Seeing HDTV-Content in Stores will immensely boost the desire for it.

Unless there's a price crash, there's not an awful lot of chance for European consumers (already £10k in debt for all those other CE goods they've purchased!) to shell out another grand on a TV when they're still paying off the recent widescreen SDTV (as much as £500-600).

There'll be a change, but I'll be surprised if at the end of next-gen's life as much as 33% of the public have widescreen TVs. This might be very different in the US, but overall without a price drop you'll have to be pretty commited videophile to buy yet another TV without copious support. I think lack of HDTV output won't impact most people this gen.

_leech_ : I think NPLs description of 16:9 as Cripplescreen very accurate. What's wrong with it? Here 16:9 broadcasts are letterboxed PAL, stretched to fit, so they're lower res than SDTV.

 

[Npl]

(and besides HDTV is 16:9 Cripplescreen)

This has to be the most uneducated comment i've seen yet...

If you pay the same or even more for a TV that aint wider and has lower height, how would you be calling it?
I know about the common arguments, pan&scan, blah,blah... but none of them bear any logic, as you could aswell display 16:9 with black bars on top&bottom. Besides were talking about using them for Games, some of which benefit greatly from having Cockpits or HUDs at the Bottom, having horizontal Splittscreen...