Revolution Tech Details Emerge ( Xbox1+ performance, 128 MB RAM )

[mckmas8808]

You are all hoping / wishing / thinking that Nintendo needs to compete with Sony and MS with power. It's about the games.

Correct. The other question is....if you already own a PS3 / 360 to play all of those "me too" titles / ports, and there are in fact good unique games for the Revolution...would you consider buying one for $300? Or more inclined at $99-$149?

I don't want to buy two consoles where there is a huge overlap in terms of functionality. That's called a waste of money.

Joe, Joe, Joe listen why couldn't Nintendo give us a $199 console? This is just a little bit too ridiculas. Another thing, great power can also make great games. If a game like Motorstorm is real believe me it could only be done due to great power.

If the Revolution can't use UE3.0 like Ty was saying eariler (I think) then plenty of games like Mass Effect, Gears of War, GTA4, etc when not be doable on the system.

 

[jvd]

Trying to guess at console BOM from PC parts that may or may not even be relevant is a bit futile.

I'll ask again...do you think a cost (not price) of say $149 is too high for the specs as we know them?

I believe so . I believe the ram fits with the pricep oint . But the power of the cpu (since we know nothing of the gpu) does not fit

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Joe, Joe, Joe listen why couldn't Nintendo give us a $199 console?

Because they want to appeal to a larger audience / and especially first time gamers?

Why couldn't MS and Sony give us a $1000 console?

This is just a little bit too ridiculas. Another thing, great power can also make great games.

No argument. It can also dissuade innovative games / concepts because the cost to make use of that power can be prohibitive, making publishers take less risk with new / different titles.

If a game like Motorstorm is real believe me it could only be done due to great power.

Interesting that you are basing the goodness of a game on how it looks...

If the Revolution can't use UE3.0 like Ty was saying eariler (I think) then plenty of games like Mass Effect, Gears of War, GTA4, etc when not be doable on the system.

And?

Again...you seem to be under the impression that Nintendo cares that it can run those games, or run them with the same fidelity. I submit to you that Nintendo obviously DOESN'T.

Nintendo cares more that the console is accessible to far more people (price) than power. You all don't seem to get this.

Now, whether or not this turns out to be a good strategy in the end...only time will tell. It's certainly a valid approach to take IMO, whether they succeed or not.

 

[mckmas8808]

I'm not expecting xbox 360 power now . But i do expect something much closer to xbox 360 than it is to gamecube or xbox 1 .

This to me is impossible imo. If it can not run UE3 like some are guessing then that's really telling you something.

 

[jvd]

This to me is impossible imo. If it can not run UE3 like some are guessing then that's really telling you something.

They and i disagree . Any dx 9 card should run ue3 engine games . How well is another question. Ati has already said the gpu has dx 9 shaders .

So really its only the cpu in question in terms of power .

 

[Joe DeFuria]

They and i disagree . Any dx 9 card should run ue3 engine games . How well is another question.

That would be my guess as well. Should be able to run it...the question is at what fidelity level....

 

[expletive]

Again...you seem to be under the impression that Nintendo cares that it can run those games, or run them with the same fidelity. I submit to you that Nintendo obviously DOESN'T.

Nintendo cares more that the console is accessible to far more people (price) than power. You all don't seem to get this.

Now, whether or not this turns out to be a good strategy in the end...only time will tell. It's certainly a valid approach to take IMO, whether they succeed or not.

I agree and IMO, MS is taking some pages out of Nintendo's playbook.

1. XBL Arcade, cheaper to buy, cheaper to develop, focus on gameplay, mass appeal, grow the industry
2. JA saying in recent quotes saying how they are not willing to lose money this generation.
3. 2 Sku system where the core is designed to drop in price quickly to 199 or less ASAP

I honestly think MS would be happy with a very modest market increase this generation, make lots of money like nintendo, and establish the whole MCE-extender XBL community thing this gen. Suer theyll take a big piece of Sonys market if it comes, but i think theyd be jsut as happy with profitiability and means to stay in the business making money over the long haul as they work towards a more strategic 'whole house media network/mass market appeal' plan.

 

[mckmas8808]

Because they want to appeal to a larger audience / and especially first time gamers?

Why couldn't MS and Sony give us a $1000 console?

Because they wouldn't be able to sell a $1000 console and that question is straight laughable.

No argument. It can also dissuade innovative games / concepts because the cost to make use of that power can be prohibitive, making publishers take less risk with new / different titles.

So what is stopping devs from making games like Kamanari Damacy?

Interesting that you are basing the goodness of a game on how it looks...

No don't change my point. My point is great looking games actually do matter. Why do we always see graphics as a grade including sound, gameplay, and value? Because it's important that's why.

And?

Again...you seem to be under the impression that Nintendo cares that it can run those games, or run them with the same fidelity. I submit to you that Nintendo obviously DOESN'T.

Nintendo cares more that the console is accessible to far more people (price) than power. You all don't seem to get this.

Now, whether or not this turns out to be a good strategy in the end...only time will tell. It's certainly a valid approach to take IMO, whether they succeed or not.

But shouldn't we care that Nintendo cares about 3rd party games? Shouldn't we care that Nintendo cares about great proven 3rd party franchises?

 

[jvd]

But shouldn't we care that Nintendo cares about 3rd party games? Shouldn't we care that Nintendo cares about great proven 3rd party franchises?

They will . They should have what 4 generations of proven 3rd party franchises .


As for new 3rd party we most likely will see exlusive titles that take advantage of the new controller on the system.


For me I don't care if 1000 games come out a year or 10 games as long as those 10 games are really fun and apeal to me .

at a 100-150$ price point many consumers wont mind getting less games than a 400$ system .

 

[mckmas8808]

I agree and IMO, MS is taking some pages out of Nintendo's playbook.

1. XBL Arcade, cheaper to buy, cheaper to develop, focus on gameplay, mass appeal, grow the industry

Oh thanks expletive and this is another big reason why cheap to make games are no excuse for Nintendo. MS already has it NOW. XBL Arcade already covers the devs that want to make cheap and fun games. Sorry.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I agree and IMO, MS is taking some pages out Nintendo's playbook.

1. XBL Arcade, cheaper to buy, cheaper to develop, focus on gameplay, mass appeal, grow the industry

Agree 100%. And for the record, this seems to be a good strategy based on initial reaction...I've heard almost heard more about Geometry Wars than any other game on 360.

In a way, this bodes well for revolution. One thing MS doesn't have is the back catalog of Nintendo games.

2. JA saying in recent quotes saying how they are not willing to lose money this generation.
3. 2 Sku system where the core is designed to drop in price quickly to 199 or less ASAP

Agree there too. IMO, so far MS has done just about everything right this gen in terms of making required trade-offs, assuming the goal is to significantly increase market share. This doesn't mean they'll be successful, but I think they've put themselves in the best position possible.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Oh thanks expletive and this is another big reason why cheap to make games are no excuse for Nintendo. MS already has it NOW. XBL Arcade already covers the devs that want to make cheap and fun games. Sorry.

But as a consumer you have to pay $300-$400 entry fee first. Sorry.

 

[mckmas8808]

For me I don't care if 1000 games come out a year or 10 games as long as those 10 games are really fun and apeal to me .

at a 100-150$ price point many consumers wont mind getting less games than a 400$ system .

But jvd that's the problem. If people like you only care about buying a few 3rd party games a year then wouldn't that hurt the bottom line for those said 3rd parties? If exclusive 3rd party games sell lets say on average 50,000 titles, while the PS3 and 360 3rd party titles sell on average 200,000 titles then what's the point?

 

[mckmas8808]

But as a consumer you have to pay $300-$400 entry fee first. Sorry.

But didn't alot of you guys say that the 360 could be $199-$249 next year? Does that price really sound that bad?

Disclaimer: I personally don't believe that the 360 will be $199 next year, but do acknowledge that a $249 360 next year is possible.

 

[expletive]

Oh thanks expletive and this is another big reason why cheap to make games are no excuse for Nintendo. MS already has it NOW. XBL Arcade already covers the devs that want to make cheap and fun games. Sorry.

Well at first i thought this was bad news but think about it. How many people on this board would buy one for $99? Imo, EVERYONE. You get the nintendo franchises with better graphics, a few nifty concept games with the controller thingy, and a stable of retro games for $99. Funny but for me 149 may as well be 199 and different decision, but $99 thats a no brainer. Who cares if they dont compete with Sony and MS for grfx? We have MS and Sony for that !

 

[Joe DeFuria]

But jvd that's the problem. If people like you only care about buying a few 3rd party games a year then wouldn't that hurt the bottom line for those said 3rd parties? If exclusive 3rd party games sell lets say on average 50,000 titles, while the PS3 and 360 3rd party titles sell on average 200,000 titles then what's the point?

1) Assumption is it costs less to develop, so you don't need to sell as many copies.
2) You are assuming that Nintendo won't sell more hardware units at their low price point than MS and Sony will sell at a higher price. This is not a given.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

But didn't alot of you guys say that the 360 could be $199-$249 next year? Does that price really sound that bad?

It's definitely worse than $99-$149.

 

[expletive]

But didn't alot of you guys say that the 360 could be $199-$249 next year? Does that price really sound that bad?

Disclaimer: I personally don't believe that the 360 will be $199 next year, but do acknowledge that a $249 360 next year is possible.

That price gap between the revolution and the 360 core system will be critical. MS is bringing a lot of value-add services and mass appeal games to the table as well, so that battle will be interesting.

When you look at it, MS could be sandwiched int he middle. They may end not being the cheapest by $100 or the most expensive by $100 (e.g. Rev=200, 360=300, ps3=400). The question i have is... Is that good or bad? Do they become 'everything to everyone' or 'nothing for anyone'?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Who cares if they dont compete with Sony and MS for grfx? We have MS and Sony for that !

That is basically my opinion.

Why do I want a third console to compete directly with MS/Sony? What good does that do us really?

I don't want that. Basically, I want Nintendo games as cheaply as possible. The only ones that seem to care that Nintendo competes in power, are a certain subset of Nintendo fans who want to buy only a Nintendo console.

On the other hand, I can sympathize with fans of certain franchises (Metroid / Zelda) that just want the next game in the series to take advantage of more powerful hardware...

 

[Joe DeFuria]

The question i have is... Is that good or bad? Do they become 'everything to everyone' or 'nothing for anyone'?

Perfectly stated. I was thinking the exact same thing.