Why would nintendo release an underpowered console a year after the release of 360?

[Epik]

Whats they piont of doing that? They spent 6 years on the hardware(when it comes out) yet its weaker than a console that was made in 2 years?

They said they were competing with Sony. So why would they release a gossly underpowered console that late just to be blown away by PS3 if they didn't have something relevant to make it compete with PS3?

Common sense.

 

[µCOM-4]

What really matters is what you see on the screen, not theoretical numbers.

 

[Epik]

What really matters is what you see on the screen, not theoretical numbers.

true

I want to see some in game benchmarks before I say who the most powerful.

 

[function]

If you use the word "UNDERPOWERED" it'll never make sense.

If you use words like "lower power" or"targetting a different price/performance level" or "looking to enter the market at a lower price point" it can be seen to make a lot more sense. Nintendo always feel their systems have enough "power" for what they want them to do.

As I said in another thread, "Nintendo aren't on the same technology curve as their competitors".

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why would Ford release a car a year after Ferrari that's much less powerful? Different market.

As illustrated with the GameBoy Micro, Nintendo are releasing a lower power tech after their rivals have released (relative to PSP). The reason is a different price-point market. Nintendo have managed to dominate the handheld sector through the least powerful hardware. The PS2 power < XB & GC but it's still the system that appeals the most. Power != success. It's only in internet fora that spec numbers amount to anything.

If Nintendo released a machine at half the 'power', for a lower price, nicer form factor, that had great looking games and a unique and involving interfacing system (the 'Revolution'), with suitable marketting it could potentially decimate the games industry.

 

[scificube]

lot's of if's there...

Power != dominance, but less power with success != the whole story.

 

[Powderkeg]

If Nintendo released a machine at half the 'power', for a lower price, nicer form factor, that had great looking games and a unique and involving interfacing system (the 'Revolution'), with suitable marketting it could potentially decimate the games industry.

Not without massive 3rd party support, and Nintendo won't get that until they can convince Nintendo owners to buy 3rd party games en masse. That's something they aren't willing to do now.

 

[deathstar121]

There CPU might not be up to standards of Xenon, or Cell so they can keep the price down, but I think there GPU will be sweet probably better than everyone.

 

[Teasy]

Function, releasing a system at the same time as the competition and sacrifying power for a lower price can make sense yes. But to do the same when releasing the system a year later doesn't make sense.

As the original poster points out Revolution has been in development for a long time. So why do Nintendo plan to release it so late? The logical answer would be so they can take advantage of newer technology in order to produce something very competetive at a lower price (just like they did with GameCube).

 

[Confidence-Man]

Whats they piont of doing that? They spent 6 years on the hardware(when it comes out) yet its weaker than a console that was made in 2 years?

They said they were competing with Sony. So why would they release a gossly underpowered console that late just to be blown away by PS3 if they didn't have something relevant to make it compete with PS3?

Common sense.

They aren't competing with the PS3 or X360.

 

[hugo]

I won't say it's underpowered.You've seen the casing and it's about a size of a modem.It will still pack a punch with graphics that are equally as good as a top of the line pc at that time.All these without blowing a hole in consumers pocket don't you think it's something good?

 

[Epik]

Function, releasing a system at the same time as the competition and sacrifying power for a lower price can make sense yes. But to do the same when releasing the system a year later doesn't make sense.

As the original poster points out Revolution has been in development for a long time. So why do Nintendo plan to release it so late? The logical answer would be so they can take advantage of newer technology in order to produce something very competetive at a lower price (just like they did with GameCube).

No they just can't see nintendo doing anything good. Peer pressure mixed with bias and FUD misinformation and half truths.

They don't want to be the one to say nintendo is doing something good because the other biased peers will shun them and call them a Nintendo fan.

If your not spouting "Nintendo is TEH DOOMED" or "Nintendo is kiddie" negative reiteric your not credible or your a nintendo fan.
I see this kind of tribalistic behavior before.


This is kind of like politics.Bush is evil. Bush is satan(yeah like he's psychic or god and is incapable of making mistakes or doing good or having perfect knowledge of the future). heh. Clinton is a pervert. Clinton is evil. (was that anyones business? and how many couples have marritial problems? yeah remember these are PEOPLE)Same partisan demonizing but only in a different forum.(video-games)

They don't want nintendo to do well because it...
a)contradicts the thick countermarketing propoganda that"nintendo is DOOMED! OH NO"
b)They are playstation or xbox fans
c)They are too insecure to like anything that Big Biases/paidoff Media says is "kiddie" or "rehash"(countermarketing buzzwords) or "unique".console sheep...follow the crowd....
d)Embarrassed to have a nintendo product(again insecurity)because they fear thier friend will shun them and call them a nintendo fan.
e)Misinformed definition of what is mature.No gore gun sex and violence=kiddie...so tetris,high level SSBM play,myst, GuiltyGearXX reload,high level Streetfighter play, are kiddie right?

kiddie,rehash=buzzword

So Teasy don't worry about it. Don't let it get to you.

 

[Epik]

They aren't competing with the PS3 or X360.

Nintendo has already said they are releasing its next gen console near its competition....Sony

Yes they are.

 

[Epik]

I won't say it's underpowered.You've seen the casing and it's about a size of a modem.It will still pack a punch with graphics that are equally as good as a top of the line pc at that time.All these without blowing a hole in consumers pocket don't you think it's something good?

I know its doesn't look powerful(size=power misinformation).....arghhh


Think if it was sony making a console that was that size. Would Sony put out a machine that was just as powerful as a current high end computer?

Doesn't this contradict what nintendo has said about making it easier and cheaper to develop for? Porting would be expensive and making ports will be too. So no.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Take a realistic look at where Nintendo is, and where Sony and Microsoft are.

Sony and Microsoft are both releasing very powerful systems that both give developers enormous development hurdles to deal with. Extracting as much parallelism as possible in their game code and trying to come up with a code base that will work with both Cell and Xenos will be quite costly and time consuming. If Nintendo went the same route- how many developers would be bothered to port a title?

In realistic terms Nintendo has to come out with a system that is easy to develop for and keeps costs and time spent to a minimum if they want to have any third party support. They also need to approach the market with some capability for offering a unique experience and they need to do this while coming in at a price point that considerably undercuts the competition.

That is the reality of the market, offering up a system with enormous power that takes a lot to extract at a $400 price point would be suicide for Nintendo, and they are not stupid. The DS looked weak in comparison to the PSP but the marketplace reality is showing us that maybe Nin did know what they were doing in worrying about keeping the price down and also keeping dev costs in check. While the PSP has a lot of attractice games 'on the horizon' with considerably longer dev times those titles keep hanging out 'on the horizon' and it doesn't seem to be getting any closer.

If 3rd parties are forced in to a situation where they need to spend as much time and effort on the Revolution that they do on the other two Nintendo is in an extremely difficult position. As much as people like to lament the Cube they would do well to remember that the Cube has had significantly more 3rd party support then the N64- they are headed in the right direction on that front even if they aren't up to Sony and MS's level.

Sure, we all want to see three technological juggernauts slugging it out for supremacy, but if consumers are looking down the barrel of three $400 systems one of which has no third party support Nintendo is done. As a $200 alternative it makes for a nice second system which this generation has proven is a quickly expanding market segment.

I am more then a little p!ssed off about the lack of HDTV support on the Rev, but looking at the hardware it appears that Nin should be able to run titles from the other systems at a lower resolution without major modifications. For the first couple of years at least they also will likely be looking very pretty with their processor as extracting peak performance out of it is familiar territory with developers. Despite their plans to launch 'late'(actually it isn't if you look at from a historical perspective, just MS messed up the timetable this launch) it appears that Nintendo should be looking relatively strong out of the gate particularly to price sensitive shoppers and those looking to own multiple systems.

 

[Confidence-Man]

Nintendo has already said they are releasing its next gen console near its competition....Sony

Yes they are.

"Similar to the relationship that the DS has with the PSP, we won't fight over the same share of the pie with another company. We have no intention of fighting over shares of the market in a way that will shrink it. For us, success will depend on whether we can call back people that have stopped playing games, and whether we can also bring in a new base of customers. That way, our share [of the market] will increase since the market will grow bigger," Iwata said.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/01/14/news_6116439.html

If you've been paying attention to anything Nintendo has been saying for the past year or so you'd be under no misconceptions as to what their focus is for Revolution.

 

[Epik]

Take a realistic look at where Nintendo is, and where Sony and Microsoft are.

Sony and Microsoft are both releasing very powerful systems that both give developers enormous development hurdles to deal with. Extracting as much parallelism as possible in their game code and trying to come up with a code base that will work with both Cell and Xenos will be quite costly and time consuming. If Nintendo went the same route- how many developers would be bothered to port a title?

In realistic terms Nintendo has to come out with a system that is easy to develop for and keeps costs and time spent to a minimum if they want to have any third party support. They also need to approach the market with some capability for offering a unique experience and they need to do this while coming in at a price point that considerably undercuts the competition.

That is the reality of the market, offering up a system with enormous power that takes a lot to extract at a $400 price point would be suicide for Nintendo, and they are not stupid. The DS looked weak in comparison to the PSP but the marketplace reality is showing us that maybe Nin did know what they were doing in worrying about keeping the price down and also keeping dev costs in check. While the PSP has a lot of attractice games 'on the horizon' with considerably longer dev times those titles keep hanging out 'on the horizon' and it doesn't seem to be getting any closer.

If 3rd parties are forced in to a situation where they need to spend as much time and effort on the Revolution that they do on the other two Nintendo is in an extremely difficult position. As much as people like to lament the Cube they would do well to remember that the Cube has had significantly more 3rd party support then the N64- they are headed in the right direction on that front even if they aren't up to Sony and MS's level.

Sure, we all want to see three technological juggernauts slugging it out for supremacy, but if consumers are looking down the barrel of three $400 systems one of which has no third party support Nintendo is done. As a $200 alternative it makes for a nice second system which this generation has proven is a quickly expanding market segment.

I am more then a little p!ssed off about the lack of HDTV support on the Rev, but looking at the hardware it appears that Nin should be able to run titles from the other systems at a lower resolution without major modifications. For the first couple of years at least they also will likely be looking very pretty with their processor as extracting peak performance out of it is familiar territory with developers. Despite their plans to launch 'late'(actually it isn't if you look at from a historical perspective, just MS messed up the timetable this launch) it appears that Nintendo should be looking relatively strong out of the gate particularly to price sensitive shoppers and those looking to own multiple systems.

great point....

but a few things to add...

*port modifacations=cost=bad
*nintendo has already siad that they will not have inferior hardware compared to 360 and PS3
*nintendo has already said in an interview that they will be competitive.
*PR nightmare
*again why would nintendo release a console thats underpowered a year after 360 when they spent 6 years making it yet 360 took 2 year? Why can't they take advantage of new technology and push it past 360?
*nintendo has already said they were competing with sony and is releasing thier console near Sony's launch.
*The DS argument is bunk as nintendo said they weren't competing with PSP. GBA and GBA2 is.DS is a completely new tier.

 

[Epik]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/01/14/news_6116439.html

If you've been paying attention to anything Nintendo has been saying for the past year or so you'd be under no misconceptions as to what their focus is for Revolution.

Exactly...

Nintendo's direction hardware designed for video games

Sony and Microsofts's direction hardware designed for multimedia functions.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No they just can't see nintendo doing anything good. Peer pressure mixed with bias and FUD misinformation and half truths.

They don't want nintendo to do well because it...
a)contradicts the thick countermarketing propoganda that"nintendo is DOOMED! OH NO"
b)They are playstation or xbox fans
c)They are too insecure to like anything that Big Biases/paidoff Media says is "kiddie" or "rehash"(countermarketing buzzwords) or "unique".console sheep...follow the crowd....
d)Embarrassed to have a nintendo product(again insecurity)because they fear thier friend will shun them and call them a nintendo fan.
e)Misinformed definition of what is mature.No gore gun sex and violence=kiddie...so tetris,high level SSBM play,myst, GuiltyGearXX reload,high level Streetfighter play, are kiddie right?

As a new kid on the block you're not going to last long here. Your first few posts have been Nintendo propaganda. This thread was started as a 'why?' question but the moment people start debating (which means suggesting different opinions some of which may disagree wtih your point of view) you come back with the old 'your mindless, biased know-nothings suckered in by Sony and MS FUD' arguments, rather than counter-argue with your own intelligent points.

eg. You argue Nintendo are after the same market, in direct competition with PS3 and XB360. I believe over the past year they have been saying quite the contrary. Confidence-Man has quoted Iwata from an interview saying EXACTLY they weren't going head to head, but you've just followed with a denial and no supporting quote to back that up...

*nintendo has already said they were competing with sony and is releasing thier console near Sony's launch.

From where I'm sitting, with words from Iwata's mouth ("we won't fight over the same share of the pie with another company"), why should I believe what you say their gameplan is?

If you want to question the ins and outs of Revolutions size, time of release and relative capabilities, that's fine, though to date without any new information to go on it's all been said already and a Search will find the relevant debate where your opinion has already been argued by others of a like mind. But if, as currently seems to be the case, you are appearing here to evangelize the Way of Nintendo, please stop.

 

[Confidence-Man]

Exactly...

Nintendo's direction hardware designed for video games

Sony and Microsofts's direction hardware designed for multimedia functions.

Huh?

Their focus is on making a small, quiet, affordable console that will use technology in ways other than hardware power.

Shigeru Miyamoto: You know, I didn't get a chance to see the Sony and Microsoft presentations for myself, but from what I've heard from people it sounds like they are going to be using cutting-edge technology, as are we. However, the way that they are planning on implementing that technology is obviously very different from the route that we're going to be taking.

Shigeru Miyamoto: You know, in regard to the power of the Nintendo Revolution versus, say, the Xbox 360, we're looking at making a small, quiet, affordable console. If you look at trying to incorporate all that, of course we might not have the horsepower that some other companies have

http://cube.ign.com/articles/617/617000p1.html