Topic: Ian Sane post

[nickmitch]

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

[animecyberrat]

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

[PIAC]

Quote
So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself? So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?

DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRR  

[animecyberrat]

.....

[stevey]

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

[nickmitch]

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

[Athrun Zala]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr ror

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

[stevey]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

[vudu]

I hate you.

[Darkheart]

I hate you.

[nickmitch]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

[Stratos]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

Your browzers... let me crash them

[NWR_insanolord]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

Your browzers... let me crash them

I'm glad to be able to say that iPhone Safari is a bad enough dude to not be crashed by this and has been able to continue this great work (though it took insanely long to scroll).

[stevey]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

Your browzers... let me crash them

I'm glad to be able to say that iPhone Safari is a bad enough dude to not be crashed by this and has been able to continue this great work (though it took insanely long to scroll).

[Stratos]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

Your browzers... let me crash them

I'm glad to be able to say that iPhone Safari is a bad enough dude to not be crashed by this and has been able to continue this great work (though it took insanely long to scroll).

That book was amazing. It deserves a thread of it's own.

The cake is a lie.

[ThePerm]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
<img src="http://img62.exs.cx/img62/7817/reggiehead.gif" border="0"><img src="http://img83.exs.cx/img83/7476/emot-zoid1.gif" border="0"> 

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: stevey

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm

Quote
Originally posted by: teh retarded jack ass
Report this to a moderator

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman

Quote
Originally posted by: MattVDB

Quote
Originally posted by: I Genius

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok

Quote
Originally posted by: Pale

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim

Quote
Originally posted by: pudu

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: Worst PGC Guy

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: Ms.Pikmin

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
 It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way. It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever. I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate. So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue. So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up. I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches. Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them. The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again. Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great. Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves. The multiple console features sounds pretty cool. I probably would never use it but I still like the fact that the option is there if I want it. Nintendo traditionally has been really inflexible regarding rarely-used functionality. It's like if 90% of the userbase won't use it they won't bother to support it. So it's good to see them including such a feature because a few years ago they would probably never have even considered it. No games shown until 2006? Hey Nintendo. You do realize there's this Xbox 360 thing being released this month that has, you know, games and screenshots and hype and stuff and is like a direct competitor trying to steal customers from you, right? Ever thought of, I don't know, releasing at least a f*cking screenshot to try to get people to actually know the Rev exists. I understand that they want people to play the games the first time they see them but the thing is if the games don't look pretty enough to stand on their own in screenshots then they're not going to be able to compete against the X360 or PS3 anyway. TV and print ads are probably the most common videogame ads and those cannot convey gameplay. The game has to look good to get people's attention. That's what draws them to the store demo or convinces them to rent the game. Why was Donkey Kong Country such a big hit? Because it had amazing graphics that got people's attention and when they tried the game out the gameplay delivered. A lot of people say gameplay over graphics but I think gameplay AND graphics are important. Nintendo wants to attract portions of the general public that don't play games. How do you get their attention? Well great visuals usually helps. Final Fantasy VII's famous commercial didn't show blocky polygons menu fighting. Why? Why can't a Rev game play great yet also look good in screenshots? If the games require one to actually play them in order to build interest then the Rev is screwed because trying a game requires effort and the general public won't put in the effort unless something that translates through television or a picture grabs them by the balls first. There is no reason why Rev games can't wow someone based on screens alone. No reason aside from any inane Nintendo stubborness anyway. If the games look like ass but play great then, yeah, waiting until they can demonstrate them fully makes sense. But there's no good reason WHY the games have to be that way.

I think Ian has a good point here.

Where?

Can't you read?  It's all genius.

IT'S A TRAP!

THAT IS A FASCINATING POINT YOU MAKE, SIR

The text column just gets smaller and smaller!  FASCINATING

Fascinating indeed.

Oh I concur.

I find this comment quite shallow and pedantic...Yes...quite...

It lacks deep literary references!

One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish!

Are you mocking my superior state of mind? Maybe if I worked at a gas station, I'd know what you are babbling about.

Maybe if you worked in a Zelda game you'd be able to look around the room! >=O

I do not know why we are continuing this madness.

Then it's okay if we blame you for the broken scroll bar?

I don't know if it's a little late at this point, but I'd like to take note of the fact that the topic of the profit margin deficiency was conveniently left out of previous discussion.

To quote the person above then add nothing.......

Notice how the original post gets wider with every post? Let's try and make the original post fit on one line.

@%$@% forgot to quote pmsl!

Edit: wow! notice the left side of my post does not match with the rest of them...a PGC Forum first?

that's the way it is.

tl;dr <font color=38264D><span style="background-color: 38264D;">ror</span></font>

Thank you for your deeply constructive, and thought provoking contribution to this thread... which is now stretching my browser in cruel and unnatural ways thanks to all this quoting (irony of being apart of it noted).

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
THIS TRAP HAS TO STOP!!!!

IAN SAYS:

I love Nintendo, and hate MS and Sony.
NO, I Love Nintendo, but wish they behaved like MS and Sony.
But, I Hate MS and Sony; and Love Nintendo...Yet Sony and MS Are Above and Beyond Nintendo Next Generation.


I dont know what to do with my life cos im poo.

oh no you dont!!! ah ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ah

If this keeps up, the original post may actually become readable.  (Oh yes, I went there)

t3h v3rb4llY pwnd!

i cant even tell who is saying what anymore. coz im dum lol

ok for one why do we even exist, i beleive that the world will end in 15 seconds from now in which
case we should all dance around naked and look for the secret fo truth which can only be found within
the lair of the elves, furthermore we should all see what the goblins are up to because they all have something
 interesting to say, because if the dont the we could all be in some trouble like the magical land of the gold fish eaters
who have large snouts and green hair that is  very attractive and appealing likew the horses that graise around hyrule that
i would like to ride like epona and various other animals like emus camels  ostriches llamas and even giant pigeons, also i would
like us to make peace with the demons in doom, why do we need to shoot them when we can hug them and they can be our
friends? Its not because i think their weird, its just that they are very unusual in the way that they act like elves and
dance like faires. I would like to write a storyt about these dkinn who in my younger years guided me through
the cavers where i met a minataur who chased me through  a maze and told me that i have to run a
million times around the earth like superman who could see through wals, also i would like to
 walk through walls and turn invisimble, because if i could do that i could go places
 that are unknown to the human perspective, also wouldnt it be cool if everyone in the
 world all had red porches. I mean that is just crazy tell me about it. so how are you. im fine.
cool cool. so whats up are you going to the river tonightr. i dont know. come on dont be a wimp.
well i dont know. dont be a wimp i dont want to. shut up and listen ok?

FIXED!!!

More like slightly less broken

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
F*ck it.  I can't quote all that.  And the problem with this thread is that Xbox 360 is coming out next weekend, and NOBODY HAS EVEN HEARD OF THIS FORUM.  I mean f**king f**k d*** f***.  How does PGC expect to win the forum wars with this disjointed S***?

Clearly we will quote our way to victory. The path is clear, my son, if you can see it.

So finally my wheel scroll is broken, thanks alot ¬_¬

Quick, everyone abandon topic while they can, the forums can't take much more at this stage.

bump

I concur, and this thread is now a black hole in terms of loading time.

hahaahhha, I have really fast broadband, so it only took seconds to load!!!!

can you do this?

It's seem to load alright for me with my 7 year old computer and the worst dail-up ever.

What happened to the Boondocks strips that I posted?

So ok am I the only person who read the entire thread? did anybody else notice the original post was copy/pasted and actualy repeated itself?



oh yeah and um... yeah, just yeah

MEGABUMP!!!

Nice.

this thread is SO made of WIN....

Go forth thread, destroy the new forum like the old! Mu ha ha ha!!!!!!

Ok, but only because you say so.

Because it had to be done.

I laughed every time I got to a new post.

PS-Don't click the spell check button when quoting this beast.

QUITE RLY?

Your browzers... let me crash them

I'm glad to be able to say that iPhone Safari is a bad enough dude to not be crashed by this and has been able to continue this great work (though it took insanely long to scroll).

That book was amazing. It deserves a thread of it's own.

The cake is a lie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPRMw_bW2hs&feature=fvhl

[Crimm]

All signs indicate that this thread needs to be set on fire.

[Stratos]

You need to be set on fire. This thread is amazing.

[Khushrenada]

of

And