Revolution will not support HD (official)

[Shark Sandwich]

Really, I don't care what Nintendo does, as long as it's fun! I don't see Revolution as my "primary" next-gen console. I'm sure I'll end up buying all 3 next-gen consoles anyway. If I want graphics that will blow me away, I'll play PS3 or X360. Nintendo has their own plans, as crazy as they might be. I'm sure they've got something very interesting in store for us. I'm excited to find out what exactly it is.

Nintendo has made some crazy business decisions in the past, and I'm sure they will make a few more crazy decisions with Revolution. X360 and PS3 are, at the moment, competing solely in terms of technology. Saying "screw technology, it's about fun!" is the best thing Nintendo can do right now. They realize that they can't compete with gigaflops or gigahertz or whatever. They're going to try to make something fundamentally different from their competitors. They've even said that they don't see themselves as direct competitors with Sony or Microsoft anymore. X360 and PS3 are the systems you want to play if you want insane, cutting-edge technology. Revolution is going to do something different. I truly hope there's room for both.

 

[Fox5]

Really, I don't care what Nintendo does, as long as it's fun! I don't see Revolution as my "primary" next-gen console. I'm sure I'll end up buying all 3 next-gen consoles anyway. If I want graphics that will blow me away, I'll play PS3 or X360. Nintendo has their own plans, as crazy as they might be. I'm sure they've got something very interesting in store for us. I'm excited to find out what exactly it is.

Nintendo has made some crazy business decisions in the past, and I'm sure they will make a few more crazy decisions with Revolution. X360 and PS3 are, at the moment, competing solely in terms of technology. Saying "screw technology, it's about fun!" is the best thing Nintendo can do right now. They realize that they can't compete with gigaflops or gigahertz or whatever. They're going to try to make something fundamentally different from their competitors. They've even said that they don't see themselves as direct competitors with Sony or Microsoft anymore. X360 and PS3 are the systems you want to play if you want insane, cutting-edge technology. Revolution is going to do something different. I truly hope there's room for both.

Nintendo is one of the richest companies in the world, if they can't compete in technology then exactly who can?
And it doesn't matter if they don't think they're in competition with MS and Sony, they still compete for the same entertainment dollar. It's said that PSP and DS don't compete, but they certainly still do, despite being far different in capabilities.

 

[Pozer]

"The Revolution will not be televised".......in HD resolution.


Sorry couldn't resist.


btw, Ever get the feeling Teasy's grandparents played in the Titanic's orchestra?

 

[Pozer]

seriously though, I still think despite these negative Nintendo reports lately they haven't played their big trump card yet. We still don't know the revolutionary part of the revolution.

 

[randycat99]

...a custom 2.5" disc, reverse-sweeping BR drive?

 

[Inane_Dork]

seriously though, I still think despite these negative Nintendo reports lately they haven't played their big trump card yet. We still don't know the revolutionary part of the revolution.

I'm not entirely sure Nintendo knows what the revolution is, either.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/07/news_6127075.html

Today, during a business strategy conference in Japan, senior director and general manager of Nintendo Entertainment Analysis and Development (EAD) Shigeru Miyamoto disclosed that the Revolution's controller not only hasn't reached its final form factor, but is still very much in flux.

"We're at a stage where we're adding and removing various kinds of functions, which has been very fun," he said. Miyamoto went on to say that Nintendo's main cause for removing functions is concern that the controller could become too complex, making gameplay overly difficult.

 

[ban25]

Well, I suppose it's better than supporting HD and then removing it after the fact because "few customers make use of it."

 

[passby]

Of course it is unnecessary for the Rev. The kiddies can't afford a hdtv.





*flees*

 

[ninelven]

If this turns out to be true, I'd say the revolution is that Nintendo will be a software/hand-held company in less than 3 years.

 

[jvd]

If this turns out to be true, I'd say the revolution is that Nintendo will be a software/hand-held company in less than 3 years.

na nintendo will make millions of the rev. People will buy it just for the old games librarys .

 

[OICAspork]

It is almost unbelievably stupid not to go ahead and support HD resolutions in the coming console generation, but better graphics on standard definition are very much possible and needed. I think it was someone here in these forums that pointed out that there is plenty more that can be done at standard resolution that will have more benefit than just uping the resolution. Look at the CG in Lord of the Rings on DVD. Standard definition and an order of magnitude better than anything that has so far appeared in a game. So pushing standard defnition hard certainly can create some dazzling graphical effects next gen, but it is ass backwards not to support HDTV, even if just for a checkbox feature.

 

[randycat99]

I think it was someone here in these forums that pointed out that there is plenty more that can be done at standard resolution that will have more benefit than just uping the resolution.

That person has long since been sacked, and the designated sackers who sacked the first person have, as well, been sacked.

 

[ninelven]

People will buy it just for the old games librarys.

LOL, I've got some ocean front property to sell you...

 

[Fox5]

If this turns out to be true, I'd say the revolution is that Nintendo will be a software/hand-held company in less than 3 years.

na nintendo will make millions of the rev. People will buy it just for the old games librarys .

If that's the only good point of it, they should have teamed up with MS or Sony and released the games on one of those systems.

Revolution better really revolutionize something, or it'll be just about the most pointless system ever made.

 

[quest55720]

Everyone said the DS had no chance in hell to compete with the PSP and right now the DS is handing the PSP its ass in japan. If the controller is truely great and they have content to back it up they can make plenty of money. I am bummed they are not supporting HD but if the controller and content are great i'll pick up a revolution.

 

[Ozymandis]

I'm suprised anyone would defend this move, though. There are minimal reasons not to support HD, and plenty of reasons to do so.

Nintendo could announce that Revolution will only support wireframe rendering and there would be people going "Wow, what a great idea! I never been a big fan of textured polygons anyway; they only detract from what's really important: the gameplay!"

I know, I know. Nintendo should feel honoured to have such a... dedicated... fanbase

 

[Sean*O]

Maybe there isn't even going to be a next-gen Nintendo system?

Why would a developer sign an exclusive publishing deal with Nintendo if they will have the smallest user base?

Why would people buy a game for the Revolution (by nintendo's own apparent admission, a weaker system than 360 & PS3) when the same game will usually be multi-platform and available on the more powerful systems? Why buy the weakest version of the game?

So why even bother releasing new hardware?

They really would be better off releasing a Nintendo classics series on the other systems if that is how they expect to make money.

Nintendo could probably make much more money selling new Zelda & Mario games multi-platform on top of that.

 

[Magnum PI]

I know, I know. Nintendo should feel honoured to have such a... dedicated... fanbase

you should remove your core gamer colored glasses and look at the world with more objective eyes.

do you think that nintendo makes choices by luck ? this is the result of the work of qualified people.. as microsoft and sony they know what they are doing..

they do not things to please a small fringe of technology-loving gamers, they just look at the market and the competitors and they ask themselves how to make money in this business.

and they found out that they have more chance if they play a different card that the other competitors, what's so wrong with that ? do you belong to the school of the unique thought or what ?

even if they alienate the few with an hdtv set that leaves the vast majority of the market.. alienating a minority of the market to be more competitive for the majority makes sense, this is business not a happy gamers camp..

if some people are lacking of objectivity it's the doomsayers, the people who claim for years that nintendo will stop hardware, against every single evidence like nintendo making healthy profits ( ~ 1/2 billion USD) year after year..

the only company that had good reasons to stop hardware was microsoft, why do you think the xbox had a lifespan so short ?

 

[Kolgar]

Nintendo has made some crazy business decisions in the past, and I'm sure they will make a few more crazy decisions with Revolution. X360 and PS3 are, at the moment, competing solely in terms of technology. Saying "screw technology, it's about fun!" is the best thing Nintendo can do right now. They realize that they can't compete with gigaflops or gigahertz or whatever. They're going to try to make something fundamentally different from their competitors. They've even said that they don't see themselves as direct competitors with Sony or Microsoft anymore. X360 and PS3 are the systems you want to play if you want insane, cutting-edge technology. Revolution is going to do something different. I truly hope there's room for both.

Nintendo is one of the richest companies in the world, if they can't compete in technology then exactly who can? And it doesn't matter if they don't think they're in competition with MS and Sony, they still compete for the same entertainment dollar. It's said that PSP and DS don't compete, but they certainly still do, despite being far different in capabilities.

I think Shark Sandwich nailed it very eloquently. Nintendo's aiming at a different segment of the market, a younger market, and frankly, most of those kids just won't be playing Revolution on an HDTV.

Certainly, those old classics won't benefit much from HDTV resolutions anyway.

The fact is, Revolution sounds as if it will offer something different from Sony and Microsoft, who seem to be targeting a similar customer. Whereas S and MS will have to split that market between themselves, Nintendo is probably hoping to take the entire bottom end, the younger market, for itself.

Just like DS and PSP. I bolded your statement above because I wanted to point out that these two systems aren't necessarily competing for the same entertainment dollar.

DS appeals primarily to youngish people and existing Gameboy users. Nintendo's had a lock on this audience for years. But Sony saw an opening at the top end of the market for a more sophisticated, premium-priced machine that does more than just play games. For these people, who are likely older and more sophisticated themselves, PSP is ideal.

A similar situation seems to be happening in the console segment. Sony and Microsoft are going after that older demographic, leaving the entire younger demographic to Nintendo.

And so Revolution will find its place, both as the primary system in the kids' playroom and as a second system for older buyers and hardcore gamers.

But with S and MS chasing the same audience, Nintendo may be smart to take this alternate route.

Time will tell how well this strategy works, but it seems to me that if Nintendo can maintain its grasp on the younger market and a segment of hardcore gamers, it will continue to make money, and that is what it is in business to do.

 

[Magnum PI]

after reading so much non-sense reading your post is a pleasure, kolgar..