Post by: Jonnyboy117 on June 13, 2005, 03:59:29 PM
First they removed component video support from the GameCube; now Nintendo has confirmed that the Revolution will not be supporting high definition video outputs, such as 1080i and 1080p. Sony and Microsoft have already announced support for such formats with their respective next-gen consoles.
Nintendo of America supplied the following comment on this issue:
"There currently are no plans for Nintendo Revolution to support high-definition video output. We have thoroughly considered the best means of video output for the system and are dedicated to delivering the best hardware possible to meet the demands of our consumers. Please stay tuned for more details on Nintendo Revolution to be revealed soon."
-- Perrin Kaplan, VP, Marketing & Corporate Affairs, Nintendo of America
At this point, it remains unclear what resolutions Nintendo considers to be high definition. For instance, the 480p format is not enabled on most older television sets, but since it is only a progressive-scan version of the standard 480 line resolution, it is often not considered to be "high definition". Since GameCube supports 480p output (although new hardware units do not included the required interface), Nintendo may support at least that format with the Revolution. This possibility is further bolstered by the fact that the Revolution prototypes at E3 2005 featured an output jack that looked exactly like the now-removed "digital output" jack on the GameCube.
Post by: G3cyco on June 13, 2005, 04:28:20 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 13, 2005, 04:39:17 PM
"currently"
"demands"
"consumers"
I have no clue.
Post by: joshnickerson on June 13, 2005, 04:48:34 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 13, 2005, 04:51:06 PM
Post by: Pale on June 13, 2005, 04:52:52 PM
Regretfully, I guess the best way to bring that around is by everyone expressing their feelings about it...
=P
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 13, 2005, 05:13:14 PM
Post by: ThePerm on June 13, 2005, 06:42:25 PM
Either way Revolution Free Online > Hi-Def
Post by: JonLeung on June 13, 2005, 06:50:48 PM
It better at least have component output cables, like the kind I had to order online for my GameCube...
Post by: Rob91883 on June 13, 2005, 06:51:35 PM
This is already having a negative impact, even though I could care less about High Definition because it wont really make a difference on gameplay it's going to alienate a lot of people that want this feature just cause Xbox360 and PS3 have it.
Post by: Savior on June 13, 2005, 07:09:48 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 13, 2005, 07:18:41 PM
The truth is to the casual gamer and really even the hardcore gamers this won't be a big issue until middle of the generation or later generation. HD television is still too costly to be mainstream.
Nintendo is trying to create affordable gaming machines that emphasis the playability of the games. They are also trying to make it as easy as possible for developers to create games, and as easy as possible for those games to penetrate the market. Cheaper hardware with an intriguing hook will sell a system...specially if the price is drastically different. If it is a minor price difference like this generation was, then it won't be as huge of a deal. However, everything points out that Nintendo is trying to not only keep its hardware costs down, but also keep the games prices down, which is extremely important, because this next generation will see a huge increase in games pricing which will hurt the market.
You all may not like the choices Nintendo is making, but they believe they are helping the industry stay on track...and they may very well be.
Post by: Shift Key on June 13, 2005, 07:50:55 PM
Quote
one thing thta bothers me is that not having it will reduce sales...reducing profit...which may cost mroe then including the port for five dollars more.
It's not the five-dollar port that is the issue, its weighing the cost of adding the hardware that is required to output HDTV against the percentage of buyers who will have HDTV-capable TV sets. Much like the digital output was removed from PAL GCs, this probably won't affect me. Digital broadcast uptake in Australia has been disappointing (analog TV was meant to end next year) and the price of digital TV sets are still ridiculous.
I like and use the 60Hz mode that some GC games support (Burnout 3 on PS2 also looks amazing in 60Hz mode), and I'd be happy with an increase to 720p that most LCD and plasma TVs support. That resolution is beautiful on a good TV, and the difference between it and 1080p would only be noticed by technophiles who like to complain (and know what to complain about).
Post by: Ian Sane on June 13, 2005, 08:40:23 PM
"But with Nintendo, why does it always come down to an either/or decision? In this case, we either get high-definition games, or we get a weird, new controller. Why does a major sacrifice always have to made in order to innovate? Why can't we have both? It's such an off-the-wall approach to appeasing consumers. Imagine if Toyota came out and said, 'Well, our new Camry will have a revolutionary new steering wheel, but because we're emphasizing this new wheel, we've cut down on horsepower by 300 percent.' It'd be a disaster. And still, this is how Nintendo works, and everyone just accepts it."
I agree with that completely. Why can't we have both? This was a problem with the Cube. Nintendo had this pretty good idea for connectivity but it failed to sell Cubes. Why? Because Nintendo ran it directly against another feature, online, that the competition was offering but they themselves weren't. So connectivity became an alternative for online which completely negated it's selling power. Connectivity should have been a bonus. Connectivity plus online would have given Nintendo a clear advantage over the competition. The Cube would have been better. Instead it was just different and being different doesn't ensure sales.
If the Rev has a new way to control games (that works with old games as well of course, otherwise that's a whole different arguement) AND HD support then the Rev is better than the PS3 and Xbox 360. How could it not be? It has an extra feature. But without HD it's just different. By having a tradeoff of features Nintendo gains nothing. The two things cancel each other out. In order to gain any sort of advantage on the competition Nintendo has to first start from a level playing field and then add something creative. They have no advantage if their new idea is at the cost of other features.
Post by: ThePerm on June 13, 2005, 08:54:54 PM
Post by: Savior on June 13, 2005, 10:20:45 PM
wish i could get a free HD TV.
Post by: Shift Key on June 13, 2005, 10:42:56 PM
Wait until some solid specs are released before you grab a pitchfork and torch, Ian. You're too eager to burn Nintendo at the stake.
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 14, 2005, 04:12:37 AM
You know, Nintendo may change its mind by the time release happens. If Nintendo is waiting till November to launch then little added touches to the system like HD compatiability can be added last minute before production. The only way it will definately be set in stone is if Nintendo is actually trying for an earlier launch in summer of next year.
Personally I still believe the November launch is bogus. That is way too late giving one competitor an entire year on the market.
Post by: Pale on June 14, 2005, 05:06:54 AM
Aside from that though, I will permit this argument against Nintendo to go on... =P =P
I would suggest keeping it very constructive though and staying away from the Nintendo is Doomed mentality...
I personally think Nintendo needs to sit down and think about the projected life of the Rev. I agree that HD is far from a priority to most people right now, and MS is just trying to use it to differentiate themselves in some way.
That said, there are two things Nintendo needs to think about right now.
1. Is it worth allowing MS to differentiate themselves in this way? They are in a pretty powerful position considering they can take everything that MS does use to make themselves stand out and put it in the Rev on top of what they already plan to.
2. If they want to fight against MS's attempt to shorten the console life cycle (which I hope they do) they need to consider where TVs will be in 4 or 5 years. Just look at what they were 4 or 5 years ago. I know for a fact there is a good chance I will have one fancy TV in about 3 years, even though I have a standard def 32 inch 300 dollar TV right now.
Post by: PaLaDiN on June 14, 2005, 05:18:20 AM
Isn't HDTV the "best means of video output for the system" and the "best hardware possible"? What do they mean by "best"? Is there something better? Or is the keyword "possible"?
Why in the hell did Nintendo have a press release to say they wouldn't have a feature? With online they just let consumers figure it out for themselves. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit with Nintendo's MO. People say Nintendo is stupid but there's a certain consistent kind of "stupidity" they indulge in, and this is not it. I don't get it.
Post by: stevey on June 14, 2005, 05:40:36 AM
This for me is good news. I hate HD television, there just a scam. Intel they make a HD TV the size of a non HD TV at near the same price or under grand I'm not buying. HD is not this or next gen but next next gen 
Post by: couchmonkey on June 14, 2005, 07:02:50 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on June 14, 2005, 07:27:35 AM
Maybe they feel it's better to release the bad news now so that people don't assume that HD will be supported only to be disappointed later. The online thing pissed a lot of people off because it was widely assumed that Nintendo was going to go online with the Cube and then it slowly was revealed that they weren't. That plus the infamous Zelda footage switcheroo were both damaging because Nintendo allowed people to assume something that wasn't true. Perhaps they've learned that it would be better to clear things up right away so people don't assume things and thus get more upset when they find out Nintendo "lied" to them.
Post by: Kairon on June 14, 2005, 07:38:25 AM
Anyways, Matt Cassamassina... I can't stand the guy. LOL. He takes baseline thinking and the lowest common denominator and somehow believes that those things should be a part of Nintendo.
While I definitely wouldn't mind HD-support (even though I prob won't get an HD TV in the next 6 years), and it sure would look pretty on a features list that you might want to wave in people's faces, I don't see it as a big loss. Nintendo's success is based on one thing and one thing alone: whether or not they can make the next Mario 64.
If they make some of the greatest games of the generation, they'll always find an audience and always be profitable, whether that be in third place or first.
Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: PaLaDiN on June 14, 2005, 07:48:07 AM
Why come out and deliberately make themselves look bad?
People will probably point out interviews with Iwata... but there's a difference here. Iwata just states his philosophies and those piss people off... he doesn't actually give out facts that paint Nintendo in a bad light.
And Perrin too... why is it Perrin giving out this news? Usually she jedi evades all negative questions... to actually come out and blurt negative news is extremely unlike her (the 2-3 times debacle doesn't count because it was retracted).
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 14, 2005, 07:51:37 AM
The Hardware I really think is minium. I don't see it adding more than $50.00 to add the connections to allow HD connections...and in a year it may be in less.
So I wonder how much of this is a software decision. I am not quite sure how textures and software art works but HD could vastly be more expensive.
As I said. I believe this isn't just a hardware price concern, but I believe Nintendo is trying to keep software prices down as well.
10 extra dollars a game doesn't seem like much But I am not willing to buy a game for 69.99-79.99 dollars a game compared to the 49.99-59.99 of new games.
Now imagine if Nintendo is actually trying to get games CHEAPER. Imagine if Revolution games were easy enough to develop that you could sell them for 39.99-49.99 a new game. That price difference is huge!!! I could easily afford to buy 2 games a month compared to 1 game a month or so I buy now.
Now imagine trying to attract the nongamer and casual gamer. Are they going to buy the system for $200.00-250.00 system with games between 39.99-59.99 compared the the $300+ system (more like $350.00) and games costing 69.99-79.99??
I think this logic is one reason why the Nintendo DS is doing well still. The DS is priced at a much friendlier price point for the system and the games.
Gaming is still not essential to life. I can completely live a happy life without gaming. Therefore, prices and quality of games are important to me. Nintendo has my dollar because they are trying to keep prices low and give me bonuses like downloadable classic games. Sony and Microsoft are pricing themselves out of my dollar because I just can't afford their gaming prices.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 14, 2005, 08:00:53 AM
Well I'll agree that's probably the most important thing. At least this isn't like cartridges on the N64 where they had two huge killer apps but couldn't follow up on them. If Nintendo has a game on the Rev that really catches fire the lack of HD support won't screw them over. My big complaint is that this is another short-sighted oversight from a company infamous for them.
Plus I don't really have enough faith in Nintendo to deliver the next Mario 64. I think Nintendo is very talented but games that have the impact that Mario 64 had are very rare. It's not something they could just sit down and intentionally design and base the Rev's success on it. Realistically no one can do that. Half of the time killer apps like that come by complete accident. Nintendo is far too calculated right now to bust out a killer app like that. They're too focused on sequels and are trying too hard to innovate. They still make great games of course but they don't currently have the right mindset to make a killer app. So to keep things running smooth until a killer app arrives I feel that have to be very competent and not give people excuses to not buy Revs. That means not removing a feature the competition is offering just to save 50 cents.
Post by: Plugabugz on June 14, 2005, 08:07:26 AM
From an economic standpoint, if it's new then the price for high definition equipment will definitely be high. Existing HD equipment may be cheap, but the new NEW ones at the top end of the scale. What's to say including this won't increase the costs of production by 30%?
Not that this means anything to me. Being in Europe means WE'RE THE NEGLECTED PEOPLE OVER HERE REMEMBER US?!!!!!
Post by: PaLaDiN on June 14, 2005, 08:16:48 AM
If adding the feature is merely a matter of 50 cents then Nintendo would up the price of the console by 50 cents. They're not that stupid. There's a reason for the omission but the 50 cents isn't it.
It's probably just a matter of space... that thing is small.
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 14, 2005, 08:27:47 AM
Nintendo could have released a new version of the Gamecube with this feature and it would have immediately sold twice as many units as the Cube has sold now.
If Nintendo is able to deliver with Mario Revolution, Super Smash Brothers Revolution, and Metroid Prime 3, and finally that new IP game that is being prepped for launch then Nintendo will have a successful launch with or without 3rd party support.
This whole idea that HD is important and deal breaker is silly. When Microsoft announced this new generation the HD generation we all laughed at how stupid it sounded...yet now Nintendo is laughing and acting according to our logic and we are dooming Nintendo.
And lets not assume we actually know how much more it costs to add HD to the hardware, and then into the costs of developing games...because we just don't know. It is obviously enough that Nintendo is second guessing its importance.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 14, 2005, 08:43:45 AM
That's a cool feature but Nintendo needs more than that to sell to the hardcores. I like the idea but realistically I will probably rarely use it since I own most classic games I'm interested in. I would assume that most hardcores would also already own their favourite NES, SNES, and N64 games. So while the feature is great it's not enough to ensure huge success. I see at as extra incentive to buy a Rev but not the main reason. But then I thought hardcore gamers wouldn't put up with GBA ports either and they seemed to gleefully pay full price for them so perhaps I'm in the minority on that issue. Let's put it this way. I don't want the Rev to sell consoles based solely on this feature because then it will just be a nostalgia machine.
"When Microsoft announced this new generation the HD generation we all laughed at how stupid it sounded...yet now Nintendo is laughing and acting according to our logic and we are dooming Nintendo."
I laughed at how stupid it was for MS to FORCE devs to support HD with all games. Forcing developers to NOT use HD is just as stupid.
Post by: BigJim on June 14, 2005, 08:49:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
Are you in the US? Go to BestBuy.com. You can get a 27" HDTV for $330. Pricing parity is not as far off as some people seem to think.
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 14, 2005, 11:28:19 AM
QuoteWhat I suggest is that Nintendo looked at the video out options available and instead of coming to Microsoft and Sony's conclusion that Hi-Def has to be included 'for fear of losing customers'. Nintendo might have came to the conclusion that while HD would be nice it doesn't offer enough bang for the buck, yet. Since Sony and Microsoft position themselves, more so then not, as 'hardcore' gaming systems, they can't afford to pass up "new" technology. They might look inferior otherwise. Nintendo on the other hand doesn't need to make that decision since they focus on how well a game plays and how much fun it is to play a game, rather then just best graphics / best specs.
Originally posted by: PaLaDiNQuoteIsn't HDTV the "best means of video output for the system" and the "best hardware possible"? What do they mean by "best"? Is there something better? Or is the keyword "possible"?
Originally posted by:
Perrin Kaplan, VP, Marketing & Corporate Affairs, Nintendo of America
"We have thoroughly considered the best means of video output for the system and are dedicated to delivering the best hardware possible to meet the demands of our consumers."
QuoteMyself i'd say it fits perfectly. Nintendo's strength is its game making capabilites, right? Unless you are a 'diehard' Nintendo fan you don't buy any Nintendo console or handheld because they out spec the competition. You buy Nintendo hardware because it has games you can't get on either "superior" system. So to me, rather then making Nintendo look 'out-of-touch' it solidifies to me that Nintendo is in touch with what their core (not hardcore) gamers want. Very similar to how a Microsoft press statement about supporting Live!, HDD, 5.1, and Hi-def would reassure "you" that a Microsoft system is what "you" want.
Why in the hell did Nintendo have a press release to say they wouldn't have a feature? With online they just let consumers figure it out for themselves. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit with Nintendo's MO. People say Nintendo is stupid but there's a certain consistent kind of "stupidity" they indulge in, and this is not it. I don't get it.
With "you" of course, not literally being you, PaLaDiN, but anyone interested in what Microsoft has to say.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 14, 2005, 11:34:35 AM
So Nintendo is pleasing their fans by providing less options now? If Nintendo is in touch with what their core gamers want then their core gamers must be a very small group. That would also mean that a large percentage of this forum are not part of Nintendo's core gamers.
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 14, 2005, 12:02:13 PM
QuoteHonestly Ian.... is there any doubt that Twilight Princess won't be a massive seller? So how much would HD really increase sales of that game? Very few, since many do not own HD tv yet. As much as you many not want to admit it, Hi-Defintion is not a core feature yet. It's not going to increase sales that much because it is a hardcore feature. If you need 'hardcore' gaming, i'm sure Nintendo would point you to Microsoft and Sony. Their bussiness is making core games, games that don't cater to only the hardcore, but to everyone. You can't tell me you're only going to buy Twilight Princess only because it is a visually impressive game. Or to put it another way.... Do you honestly think Nintendo will try to out spec the PSP (or PSP2) with whatever the GBA's successor is? Hell no.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
So Nintendo is pleasing their fans by providing less options now?
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 14, 2005, 12:33:40 PM
Nintendo has stated it is trying to limit the price increases in gaming. That means hardware prices and software prices.
Nintendo is giving its core base an advanced gaming system that doesn't break their bank, and it is offering a system to 3rd party developers (Large and most importantly Small) a system that they can make games at a more affordable development costs.
All these things point to me to a Nintendo that is looking at an option. HD support. They are weighing the benefits/costs and deciding what direction to take.
To Nintendo, and also to me...anything that makes gaming cheaper makes me happy.
Nintendo may alienate a few of its fans, but those fans are not going to leave, because the fans love Nintendo for their games. Only when Nintendo fails to create fun games will Nintendo begin to lose its fans.
Now, Nintendo can actually win more marketshare by being cheaper not only in hardware, but in games.
And finally, if you think the NES/SNES/N64 backwards compatability is nothing you will be amazed. Most people do not keep all their systems and classic games. Most people also do not download emulators and ROMS and have those games on the computers...so when Nintendo launches the Revolution the download service is going to be huge.
I predict that service will be even bigger than Nintendo is planning it to be. And the more Nintendo can make deals to get 3rd party games on the service the bigger and better the results will be for everyone. I also predict original games to be created and able to be downloaded from small developers. These developers will use the download service so they can avoid the production costs of packaging and distribution.
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on June 14, 2005, 12:40:36 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on June 14, 2005, 01:10:16 PM
What does this have to do with anything?
"Ian: Its not that Nintendo is giving us less options just because. That added extra costs money in hardware, and probably adds cost to software development that will increase the prices of games."
Nintendo can just not use the port themselves and let third parties do whatever they want. So Nintendo's games can stay at $50 and if third parties want to charge $60 they can and risk competing against Nintendo's cheaper alternative.
Post by: ruby_onix on June 14, 2005, 02:16:33 PM
We really don't know the first thing about the very nature of the Revolution.
Nintendo refuses to speak about it. So how are we supposed to know if this is a good thing or a bad thing?
Is the Rev a hologram generator? Or does it have some other form of alien video? It seems unlikely, but if it does, it would make sense that this doesn't work with "HDTV". It would have to work with a regular TV (and maybe progressive scan) when it's in "NES/SNES/N64/GCN mode". Which would give Nintendo the chance to make some cruel jokes. There's no such thing as "bad publicity".
Or does the GameCube have a "wireless" TV connection, which Nintendo thinks is the coolest thing ever (and maybe it is), but it isn't up to the task of HDTV support? If that's the case, I'd say that (like the WiFi thing) Nintendo should just put a freaking port on the back of the unit, in order to satisfy everyone. It's cheaper than lost console sales.
Or is the Rev a revised "GameCube 1.5", basically a GameCube with bigger capacity media, a kickass online and backwards-compatibility plan, and a new controller that will reshape the entire videogame industry. All for the low price of $99! And, as we all know, Nintendo is a cheap bastard, and they cut the progressive scan support from the Cube because they did such an abysmally poor job in selling it. So it stays cut from the GCN 1.5.
We really have no idea what's going on. Nintendo's going into this blind, because of their addiction to secrecy. Nintendo might be making some horrible mistakes, the kind where it might have been a good idea to get some feedback first, but we just have to trust that Nintendo's not capable of doing that (LOL!), and that they've got something in the works that's going to be amazing, and can take people's interest from zero to sixty in a timespan fast enough to matter.
Post by: Savior on June 14, 2005, 02:48:32 PM
Quote
think Nintendo will try to out spec the PSP
The Next GB, was rumored to be using Gamecube architecture. If true then its ovbiously more powerfull than a PSP.
Anyways. Matt has an email NOA on this now... So its bound to get something done.
Post by: Bloodworth on June 14, 2005, 04:36:14 PM
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 14, 2005, 07:01:27 PM
QuoteOh they've talked about Revolution the console, just only in clues and riddles. My working guess is that there are multiple "revolutions". 1) Something regarding their controller 2) Something regarding Revolutions design/connections (and not just wi-fi everything) 3) "But, the advantage in our technology will also relate to areas that have no direct bering on gameplay" 4) Rather uninteresting to us but easy and low cost development 5) "Those of you who consider the possibilites of combining (?? ebident? can't figure out this word) content with an internet connection and a wireless connection and our flash memory, may begin to make educated guesses on what game experience we might be constructing."
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
My main problem with this whole thing is that...
We really don't know the first thing about the very nature of the Revolution.
Nintendo refuses to speak about it. So how are we supposed to know if this is a good thing or a bad thing?
Regarding the controller Reggie gave a hint and said, more or less, take a look at the NES, SNES, N64, and Gamecube controllers. Then said how are we (Nintendo) going to accomidate for those and revolution on a single controler? And regarding 2 - 5 those are taken from Satoru Iwata's E3 2005 presentation.
Post by: nitsu niflheim on June 15, 2005, 06:11:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJimQuote
Originally posted by: stevey
Are you in the US? Go to BestBuy.com. You can get a 27" HDTV for $330. Pricing parity is not as far off as some people seem to think.
And what kind of HD is it though? Is it HD Ready or Built in, because just because a TV is HD doesn't mean that you are going to get the benifit of the High Definition right out of the box. There's a 3rd kind of HD for TV's but I can't remember exactly what it is at the moment. For me, when I go to get a new TV, I'm going to get a HDTV with HD built in, because I won't have to buy any extra equipment or accessory to get a High Definition signal properly (I think).
Post by: nolimit19 on June 15, 2005, 06:32:10 AM
Post by: Bloodworth on June 15, 2005, 08:29:41 AM
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 15, 2005, 09:34:13 AM
QuoteVirtually no stores would carry them even if Nintendo did. Don't forget how 3rd rate the Gamecube is considered to be.
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Just like they knew what they were doing by making you buy component cables online instead of in the store when you buy your system, right?
Edit: If there was real demand for the componet cables Nintendo would know because differnt people would keep order them, and they are the only place to order them. But apparently no one did order them even when the connector was still sold with new Gamecubes. Further backing up their position, and mine, that HD is not necessary, yet.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 15, 2005, 09:47:32 AM
The fact that the Cube is considered "3rd rate" proves Bloodworth's point that Nintendo doesn't always know what they're doing.
"If there was real demand for the componet cables Nintendo would know because differnt people would keep order them, and they are the only place to order them."
This is total Nintendo logic. Next you'll tell me there was no demand for Cube online games because of poor broadband adapter sales.
Post by: vudu on June 15, 2005, 10:44:21 AM
Post by: nolimit19 on June 15, 2005, 11:27:27 AM
i was watching a business show on fox news the other day and one of the members of the panel suggested buying microsoft stock because of the upcoming release of the xbox 360. she said that it was going to wipe the floor with the ps3, partly because it wouldnt be out yet (no mention of the Revolution). as soon as this came out of her mouth, a couple other members of the panel instantly disagreed with her, saying that the xbox 360 was slowing microsoft down and that it was still losing money on the project.
point being, in the end, it all comes down to profits....i know its been said before, but apparently, nintendo doesnt view the HDTV aspect of gaming as " worth it" at this point. nintendo took the same stance on online gaming with the gamecube. as far as im concerned, they were dead right.
im not sure how much this hd crap would cost nintendo per console, but i dont think it will make that much of a difference....for those of you that have expirienced hd gaming....is it that much of a life changing expirience? it would be nice to have it as an option, but i can understand why they wouldnt go with it.
by the way, i do need to get a component cable for the cube...where is a good place to get one?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 15, 2005, 12:08:17 PM
www.liksang.com
www.play-asia.com
Mind you that when Nintendo's store says "will begin shipping new component cables on June 20-something", they've been on back order practically since last holiday season. It's like they created demand for these things after they announced that the Digital A/V ports were removed from Cubes -- more like they unknowingly created awareness by announcing bad news.
These buggers are expensive tho -- MONSTER CABLE expensive. Someone should be slapped for not allowing 3rd parties to make them.
I bought my cable at Play-Asia.
Post by: chlupe on June 15, 2005, 02:36:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: nolimit19
trust me...i dont think nitendo is perfect. i get down on nintendo as much as anyone, but nintendo is a business and business isnt about market share or "image" as much as it is about profit margins.
And Nintendo posted its first loss in a long while a few quarters ago because of its dwindling market share. So think about that.
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 15, 2005, 02:53:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: chlupe
And Nintendo posted its first loss in a long while a few quarters ago because of its dwindling market share. So think about that.
Because of dwindling market share? Did you even read the press releases on that loss?
Post by: 31 Flavas on June 15, 2005, 03:27:30 PM
QuoteSo Nintendo should just throw everything out the window, make $299 systems, increase load times by 2 minutes, release "The Man Game w/ Mario", and, of course, make systems with flimsy DVD drives so that they DRE and self-destruct after warranty. Sorry, but No, Nintendo doesn't need to be come a hipster. Sure, they won't be the "cool" kid everyone wants to hangout with, but we know what happens to cool kids now don't we?
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Virtually no stores would carry them even if Nintendo did. Don't forget how 3rd rate the Gamecube is considered to be."
The fact that the Cube is considered "3rd rate" proves Bloodworth's point that Nintendo doesn't always know what they're doing.
QuoteWell I would say its not the same argument, the purchasing motivation on component cables comes from the users end (i.e. Buying an HDTV). Where as the purchasing motivation for the BBA comes from the software developers end. In both cases, though, the purchasing motivator is very low to next to non-existant. You know, presumably you more then anyone, if someone had developed more then just Fantasy Star it would have sold BBA's just like Nintendogs sold DS systems. The fact that Nintendo wasn't interested in creating online games yet is no reason that 3rd parties couldn't and shouldn't take advantage of the ability.
"If there was real demand for the componet cables Nintendo would know because differnt people would keep order them, and they are the only place to order them."
This is total Nintendo logic. Next you'll tell me there was no demand for Cube online games because of poor broadband adapter sales.
It seems, though, that you're such a "hardcore" on fancy new gaming trends that by Nintendo not throwing caution to the wind and not supporting it means that Nintendo has completely and fully forsaken it, forever. Well, get over it.
Post by: Aussie Ben PGC on June 15, 2005, 03:50:00 PM
Quote
You know, presumably you more then anyone, if someone had developed more then just Fantasy Star it would have sold BBA's just like Nintendogs sold DS systems. The fact that Nintendo wasn't interested in creating online games yet is no reason that 3rd parties couldn't and shouldn't take advantage of the ability.
Not true. As nolimit has said, it all comes down to profit. What is the point of investing all your company's time, effort and money into developing an online game for a system if it turns out to be a total flop and doesn't make you any money? As far as I'm aware, Microsoft encourages developers to make Live games because they want more online games out there. Similarly, Nintendo was offering royalty discounts or some such thing to developers if they created games that used their 'innovative' GC to GBA cable feature.
There's also the fact that it would be incredibly difficult for third party developers to support a peripheral that isn't even getting first party support. Development kits would probably have archaic tools for online development, making the whole idea more unattractive by the second. Especially when the other two systems want online games. Nintendo made it quite clear this generation - if you want to make online games, you can go elsewhere for that.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 15, 2005, 05:50:18 PM
Since when did load times, The Man Game, and DREs sell PS2s and Xboxes? Those are flaws that most PS2 and Xbox owners hate but are willing to deal with because there's enough good stuff to make for it. If the Cube had these it would probably sell even worse. Nintendo can have a more successful console without copying Sony. Nintendo's negative image is based on stupid stuff they do that pisses everyone off including most of their fans. Nintendo's standing in the console market is largely due to their own incompetence. Sony and MS do better because they just plain don't screw up as often. Ten years ago Nintendo was on the ball. Now they're not so the Cube is seen as third rate.
At the very least if Nintendo knew what they were doing all the time they would have a more neutral image in the public eye (the Xbox is nowhere near the market leader yet it doesn't have a negative image) and at the very least wouldn't be pissing off sections of their own fanbase.
My point with the broadband adapter is that in both cases there were concepts that did not rely on Nintendo's support but required connections that Nintendo made difficult to obtain. Nintendo didn't make online games and didn't have to use Progressive Scan. Third parties still could have supported both accessories. But Nintendo didn't allow either accessory to have any widespread availability so neither sold and neither were well supported. The component cables and the broadband adapter both flopped because Nintendo made no effort to get them in people's homes. The component cables obviously will work with all games unlike the broadband adapter so it's a fair bit different, but the general point is that Nintendo didn't push either concept and then claimed there was no interest.
Post by: Shecky on June 16, 2005, 02:51:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Nintendo's biggest motivation is in limiting the cost of developing games at those resolutions. They're likely also concerned about the performance trade-off. The problem is that they're once again acting like they're leading the industry. They think they're doing licensees a favor by keeping the costs low, but they don't seem to take into account the concept that games like Madden will be put on their competitors' systems as well, and as such, EA will have already spent that money.
Bah, the whole "doing the industry a favor" thing is rubbish. There is a real cost in terms of hardware, and so this is just a corner that Nintendo plans on cutting. Doesn't mean the revolution is going to be any cheaper either - every corner that gets cut does not translate to savings to the end user. I think PaLaDiN also has a point, and they could just be fealing the market response. They have pleanty of time to tweak until the system is finalized considering they're practically a year away, and negative feedback is easier to measure
Post by: Athlon-pv on June 16, 2005, 03:56:56 AM
The revolution probably cant handle it , this will mean that Nintendo is again stuck with a "custom memory" approach for the revolution (which developers bitched about before). So again no easy ports.
Probably the whole architechture is not designed to handle such bandwidth or higher resolution graphics from the start to the finish.
Nintendo still has time i think. But it is _very_ clear that they probably underestimated the market _again_ .
Graphics sells systems , if not we be stuck still with the Atari 2600. TV's are getting cheaper and the ones with HDMI input are at "consumer" prices now anywhere between $800 $1000 for ones that support 720p (which is a clear step up from normal TV resolution).
We dont have to guess why Sony or MS like to go that way it is not even important why they want it. Even tho we been spammed to death in the early days of the XBoX with graphics that you simply couldnt get out of "a" "TV" and Xbox.
Now if Nintendo is going to scream it is all about games, i can buy a dedicated pac-man arcade to connect to my TV and play that all day long. If i wanted old SNES or N64 titles i would have bought it already (niche market again FFS Nintendo get serious).
Now is HD TV support going to be blissfull and garantee everlasting profits , NO.
Is it going to make the Revolution much more expensive , NO.
Is it going to get us going, YES.
Thank you
Post by: mantidor on June 16, 2005, 04:50:13 AM
They used to sell systems, but now it seems its simply not enough, otherwise the psp would be crushing the DS in Japan, and whats actually happening is the total opposite. The problem is not the good graphics, the problem I see is that they are already good enough! average people wont notice an important difference in the next gen, nothing even close to the 2D-3D jump and even the N64-GC jump, Im very sure of that.
And this deal of HD is really starting to get annoying, if the Rev ends in last place Im 100% sure all the internet gaming media will blame it on that, as they did with onine, and thats just a bunch of crap. The problem is and has always been basically third party support, some of the big games of the other consoles like GTA or Halo didnt have online and it didnt stop them to push their consoles in sales and popularity. Not to mention how niche internet gaming was this generation, but of course internet gaming sites cant see the whole picture, for us, posting in an internet forum, seems that online is a big deal, but guess what? this generation it really wasnt.
Post by: stevey on June 16, 2005, 04:59:13 AM
Post by: Athlon-pv on June 16, 2005, 05:15:00 AM
. And if you wanted to put me down on my own argument you could have said then howcome the PS2 is king and not the Xbox . There are somethings which cant be explained. Well if anyone knew at Nintendo that higher resolution will make them #1 again they do it in a heartbeat
Online market is still not a strong selling point, i never had the urge to buy a console to go play games online.
TV resolution just plainly sucks
"better" graphics come from framebuffer features such as anti-alias and so on. But still we need some more pixels 352*256 orso or whatever weird overscan number you wanna put there. Is nothing much to look at these days.This is a limit on TV's even stuff like NTSC and PAL differ from eachother (in colours, framerate and resolution). You will never be able todo anything more with it then the number mentioned above. While Sony boasted that their games will be a standard 2000*1000 pixels widescreen format ... 1080p . Overkill means nothing but to get stuck in the past doesnt win any awards either
.Post by: Bloodworth on June 16, 2005, 07:23:08 AM
Quote
Graphics sells systems , if not we be stuck still with the Atari 2600.
True, but HD is another ballgame. This is a graphical step that a lot of people simply won't be able to take advantage of. Plenty of people buy their TVs from garage sales or from friends that are upgrading, and would never consider spending more than $100 on a set even if they're willing to spend a lot on games.
The rumors about the Revolution being underpowered are completely based on assumption and Nintendo's "bad habit" of trying to give realistic estimates about their machines' performance, which people suddenly compare to MS and Sony's bloated numbers. But the numbers don't matter even if you are a graphics junkie, unless you can actually see a difference in the graphics. The PS2 was supposedly more powerful than the GameCube on paper, but GameCube games tend to look better overall.
Post by: Ian Sane on June 16, 2005, 07:28:24 AM
I believe the Cube ended up last not just because of no online but because of that plus several other dumb little oversights Nintendo had. No online plus a long post-launch drought, tiny memory cards, losing Rare, having the least flexible controller, having smaller discs, not having widely available demo discs, etc is why the Cube didn't really catch on. It was a combination of a lot of dumb sh!t, most of which should have been spotted a mile away. So I fear that HD is the first dumb oversight on the Rev and that more are coming. No HD support will likely be one of many problems, some of which are totally avoidable and some that aren't. This problem is easily avoidable so Nintendo should catch it now. The Cube flopped because Nintendo just kept giving people reasons not to buy it. They just gave the Rev the first reason not to buy it and they didn't have to.
Post by: Earthbound_4ever on June 16, 2005, 08:51:48 AM
, all contributed to the 'cube's basement housing.
Post by: stevey on June 16, 2005, 09:30:00 AM
WHAT! I LOVED LUIGI'S MANSOIN! LOVED IT! LOVED IT! LOVE IT!!! IT WAS THE BEST GAME I HAVE EVER PLAY!!! HOW DARE YOU SAY IT SUCK! YOU *ASTERING MONSTER!
Post by: KDR_11k on June 16, 2005, 10:30:52 AM
Post by: Pale on June 16, 2005, 11:05:41 AM
Sorry, I just thought I'd beat that horse one more time.
Do any of you get sick of taking years off of your life by stressing about a basically unannounced system? Give it a rest guys.
Post by: Athlon-pv on June 16, 2005, 01:43:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BloodworthQuote
Graphics sells systems , if not we be stuck still with the Atari 2600.
True, but HD is another ballgame. This is a graphical step that a lot of people simply won't be able to take advantage of. Plenty of people buy their TVs from garage sales or from friends that are upgrading, and would never consider spending more than $100 on a set even if they're willing to spend a lot on games.
The rumors about the Revolution being underpowered are completely based on assumption and Nintendo's "bad habit" of trying to give realistic estimates about their machines' performance, which people suddenly compare to MS and Sony's bloated numbers. But the numbers don't matter even if you are a graphics junkie, unless you can actually see a difference in the graphics. The PS2 was supposedly more powerful than the GameCube on paper, but GameCube games tend to look better overall.
I tend to agree that the numbers game that is being ran now is silly.
"All" of "us" "veteran" gamers know that because a game runs at 800*600 doesnt mean it somehow is crap and or could be the best if it somehow ran at 1024*768.
"underpowered" might not be a good term and lets turn it around, Sony and MS have overpowered PC alike gaming machine's. Which is unclear if this is an advantage at this point. Except for the fact that it is easy to program for.
Nintendo expects sales based on their games for whatever reason. Nintendo probably cant stay afloat on 3rd party titles being sold on all console's unless the owner owns just a Revolution. Nintendo by their own hands has got to make such a huge impact (gaming wise) to wipeout the competition on this front that i would be stunned if they could pull it of.
And i dont think that Revolution will be underpowered but just not "fit" todo the job with higher resolution graphics. In all estimate's and showings of the console it looks good it seems to be something they worked hard on also something which was expected (same as gamecube , new CPU new GFX chip), nothing groundbreaking.
And im not so sure if "gamers" would not buy TV with HDMI input. It seems to be a way forward better graphics and such. Let me give you an example of a TV with such features (in english)
http://www.jvc.nl/site/nl/dynapix/index.html
It shows you the options which a LCD HD TV by JVC has as a standard. And yes the world probably doesnt have as much HDTV's sold for it to be a slamdunk ....
But certainly featurewise important enough for the competitors to focus on (also due to the fact that the CPU and gfx chip on those prolly not do anything if they were just used for a standard TV signal) .
And i think when Sony launched the PS2 DVD's were not even common.
It is hard to say , my gut feeling tells me when i saw Defender of the Crown on the Amiga that i would very much like to own the computer that was able to produce such amazing graphics. But still it is a mix of games you like and good graphics more then just eye candy tech demo's with no soul.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 17, 2005, 12:50:12 AM
DVD was a different matter, you could use the DVD function if you bought a twenty dollar disk to play on it, you need a very expensive HDTV for HD.
Post by: Athlon-pv on June 17, 2005, 01:16:52 AM
The JVC products i hear have no such short comings (models introduced this year).
Check the link i gave
that will surely take away some doubt as to LCD tv's not being capable enough .Post by: KDR_11k on June 17, 2005, 08:10:27 AM
Post by: vudu on June 17, 2005, 09:01:01 AM
Post by: PaLaDiN on June 17, 2005, 09:15:44 AM
Hence the use of "most".
Post by: Athlon-pv on June 17, 2005, 09:20:02 AM
It is not as much a factor as you make it. Since the Revolution will support internet ....
Post by: nolimit19 on June 17, 2005, 01:12:18 PM
Post by: Chode2234 on June 17, 2005, 06:17:29 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on June 17, 2005, 10:18:58 PM
