Post by: WindyMan on November 01, 2005, 05:48:50 PM
Eurogamer.net is reporting that in an interview with Dutch game magazine [N]Gamer, Nintendo of Europe's marketing director Jim Merrick says that Nintendo may decide to not reveal detailed Revolution hardware specifications to the public.
The reasoning behind this, according to Merrick, is that information such as clock speed and polygon count is ultimately "irrelevant" to the consumer, and has little or no affect to how much some will like a system or its games after the console is released. When further questioned on the subject, Nintendo's official position on it is they "don't want to contribute to the cloud of meaningless information that surrounds the next generation systems."
One thing's for sure, we probably won't be getting the real meaningful information about Revolution until next year, when playable games are shown. Nintendo has promised to tell the world a little bit more about their next-gen console before this year ends, and whatever that information may be, it most certainly won't be a hardware spec sheet.
Post by: Mario on November 01, 2005, 06:24:57 PM
Now nobody can say things like "i'm not buying a Revolution because it only does 161.84 revatons per gigaflop and the PS3 does 180".
Post by: Kairon on November 01, 2005, 06:59:07 PM
Not likely though, lol. Either we'll get a leak or someone will tear apart a Rev launch unit and ppost on the internet what it all is.
Either way, Nintendo is doing all it can to avoid confronting supergiants Sony and Microsoft in a purely technical spec war. That includes this hope not to release specs, but also their decision not to show games unless they have real, actual, concrete gameplay to blow away your mind so you don't care about lens flares in screenshots.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: odifiend on November 01, 2005, 07:00:22 PM
"NO #s??? It must sux @ss!"
Post by: Berto2K on November 01, 2005, 07:28:10 PM
Post by: Nephilim on November 01, 2005, 07:33:49 PM
so it doesnt matter
Post by: WindyMan on November 01, 2005, 07:53:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyD
comparison will be made when the first game pic is released
so it doesnt matter
That's why Nintendo isn't going to show off anything until it's playable. Those screenshots will be accompanied by videos and impressions, to which comparisions will also need to be made.
I should say that yes, specs will eventually get out, but not from Nintendo if they hold true to their word. The GameCube's spec sheet is readily available on Nintendo.com, as are the PS2's and Xbox's on their respective websites. If Nintendo doesn't post the specs, then people can't use that as a comparison point and will have to look at stuff like game library and console features, which is what Nintendo is going for.
Post by: King of Twitch on November 01, 2005, 08:59:23 PM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 02, 2005, 12:50:16 AM
"It's not as good."
"Well yeah, I already knew that. But HOW not good is it?"
"Nintendo doesn't even wanna talk about it."
"That bad, huh?"
Post by: Mario on November 02, 2005, 01:07:07 AM
"I do not have eyes!"
I can play that game too...
*Man meets beautiful woman*
<Man> You seem quite pretty
<Woman> Thank you!
<Man> But I am not convinced!
<Woman> You.. what?
<Man> I need your specs baby!
<Woman> Uh... my what?
<Man> Specifications! I do not believe what I am seeing!
<Woman> Oh you!
<Man> No, really.
<Woman> Uh...
<Man> I MUST KNOW! You could really be ugly!
<Woman> But you just said I looked..-
<Man> GIVE ME AN ANSWER WOMAN!
<Woman> ...
<Man> Where are you going??
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 02, 2005, 01:17:14 AM
<Man> Woah hay, this is incredible, I can control women with this, this is the best remote ever. Come here baby!
<Woman> AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH
Post by: ruby_onix on November 02, 2005, 01:31:59 AM
Quote
"Here, have a look"
Sorry, that won't happen until "a while into 2006", and that's assuming that one look will have the desired effect. Get ready for Nintendo's mainstream image to take a major beating up until then, at the earliest.
(BTW, I do think that most/all of the "tech" comparisons on the internet are beyond useless, but running from the fight is going to be even more costly.)
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 02, 2005, 01:52:32 AM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 02, 2005, 02:05:26 AM
Yeah, the company releases specs, a bunch of unqualified couch jockeys try to make sense of the specs, come to some possibly innacurate conclusions that might not have anything to do with the games, and then their worthless opinions trickle down to a bunch of other areas.
But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.
Two to three times as powerful as a GameCube...
Post by: joshnickerson on November 02, 2005, 02:27:09 AM
"Hey, the PS3 will be able to pull off 453 Megons per second and it will have a max speed of 6.5 gigaflops!"
"And do you understand what that means?"
"No."
Post by: Thrakkerzog on November 02, 2005, 02:32:31 AM
Post by: mantidor on November 02, 2005, 03:13:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.
Thats the thing, they have never admitted they are going to be behind, they always say "our graphics are going to be comparable to competitors", that "behind" you talk aout its just numbers, and even GC was "behind" in that area.
Post by: NotSoStu on November 02, 2005, 03:17:38 AM
Post by: ThePerm on November 02, 2005, 03:51:20 AM
Post by: Nile Boogie on November 02, 2005, 03:52:59 AM
I get why some of us want specs, it will give us some sense of how the games are going to look. Many of us are not graphics whores yet we still don't want a system that's vastly underpowered, I know I don't. I don't think there would be any point to posting specs after the system is released or after some playable games are shown. The only spec I care about this disc-format. I don't believe there has been any conformation on the larger capacity disc.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 02, 2005, 04:10:46 AM
Umm...back to the point, as usual, it sounds like Revolution will be the weakest. Which doesn't matter to me that much, but what is driving me up the walls is that I want to know what the games will look like; having specs or a rough power comparison to the other consoles would be the give me an idea, but Nintendo doesn't want me to know how it compares to the others so I sit here aching to see some screenshots.
How will this affect Nintendo's sales? I don't think it hurts any more than having specs that prove Nintendo is the weakest. Nintendo plans to sell the system on the merits of the new controls, so as long as the graphics are better than the Xbox, I don't think matters. Of course, maybe Revolution isn't the weakest of the three. In that case I think it would probably be better for Nintendo to reveal some specs, although it could still be excluding itself from a big chunk of gamers if the system is better than Xbox 360, but worse than PS3 (assuming PS3 is actually the most powerful).
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 02, 2005, 04:19:02 AM
The point is it really doesn't...Their true purpose is to allow companies and fanboys to wave their probes around like morons...
Post by: Mario on November 02, 2005, 04:19:37 AM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on November 02, 2005, 05:16:43 AM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on November 02, 2005, 05:45:30 AM
I mean it's not like I'm jumping boat over this but it's stupid...no, ignorant things like this that Nintendo keeps doing thaht keeps them behind.
Post by: Mario on November 02, 2005, 05:59:12 AM
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on November 02, 2005, 06:02:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MJRx9000
So does this mean every dev from now on will sign an NDA?
They do that anyway, it's standard practice. The question is what information is protected under the NDA and what is not.
Post by: ShyGuy on November 02, 2005, 06:20:11 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 02, 2005, 06:41:45 AM
Translation: we lowballed our hardware BIG TIME and we want to keep that potentially damaging info from the public as long as possible.
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.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 02, 2005, 07:17:39 AM
Edit: I know that Nintendo's hardware is not as capable as the other two next-gen consoles, but your exaggeration of the issue is ridiculous. The 2 to 3 times more powerful (which I assume, based on who said, means 2 to 3 times as nice looking) is a lot closer to home than 20 to 30 times more powerful, which was totally misleading. Nintendo is being modest, and they may have to be, but I suspect they're being more modest than they need to be.
Post by: KDR_11k on November 02, 2005, 09:21:27 AM
They're telling prospective buyers how powerful the machine will be when you install Linux on it.
Translation: we lowballed our hardware BIG TIME and we want to keep that potentially damaging info from the public as long as possible.
Not necessarily, Nintendo is the only company I'd actually believe would hide the specs even if they're good. They're not playing hardball and they would prefer the general public to be smarter. Specs ARE misleading, you cannot make a conclusion from them without a LOT of technical expertise and even then you'll probably only find out which chips they are related to.
Perhaps they're worried that idiots will claim more processing units == better if Nintendo puts only one or two general purpose cores into their system. What if IBM gave them a Cell with fewer SPEs so there's someone who will buy all those Cells with manufacturing errors, kinda like the Intel Celeron?
Plus there's no point in lowballing that much because the chips don't get cheaper beyond a point. Since they're launching much later they should be able to get specs comparable to the X360 for a minimal price.
Post by: Artimus on November 02, 2005, 10:13:43 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on November 02, 2005, 11:45:36 AM
I used to do the same thing with any post by Stevey, but he's become more readable for me lately.Umm...yeah, power. I don't really care about it myself. If Nintendo's strategy works out, power won't matter anyway. It's all about the new controller. I obviously can't say until I play some games with it, but the more I think about the Revolution controller the more I'm convinced that Microsoft and Sony are living in the stone age pads that are essentially no different from the dual shock.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 02, 2005, 11:45:57 AM
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.
Post by: Epitaph on November 02, 2005, 11:47:29 AM
1.Either the revolution has very pathetic looking specs but is engineered in a way that makes it just as powerfull as the other 2 consols. Just look at the gamecube in terms of specs no one would think it is capable of graphics better then ps2 let alone on par with xbox looking at the specs. The problem is if they are using a system they engineered that uses unfamilliar technology people may hold it against them. If this is the casse it will be clearly visible when games are released.
2.Nintendo may also have very inferior specs which makes it really inferior and they are trying to make it less obvious by not releasing specs. If this is the casse they may be in trouble when they come out.
3.Nintendo feels that over the years specs have taken over too much publicity and by dooing this they are hoping more emphasis gets put on the games and interface instead of the power itself.
Post by: mantidor on November 02, 2005, 12:01:33 PM
"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."
see? releasing specs was more harmful than good, not releasing them wont make these internet geeks you talk about to say the Cube is underpowered just because, they need proof of some sort and they dont have it. You and everyone knows whats going to happen, hundreds of fake specs all over the internet, and in that mix even the real ones might be floating around, but it wont matter, the truth is that information will be just really fuzzy, even for casual people who dont read the internet and get their information from word of mouth.
No one will know for sure, but the games will look amazing and just the same as the ps3 and 360 for the average guy, and Nintendo will then be succesful with what they want, which is to people to dont care about specs.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on November 02, 2005, 12:07:07 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 02, 2005, 12:09:20 PM
1. Be Sony or Microsoft, release a console that costs 400 dollars at launch, get in a tech spec slugging match with a giant consumer electronics company and emperor of the universe Bill Gates, and buy into the "graphics is the best innovation of this generation" thinking like that Epic games dunce has.
2. Make fake specs.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: ruby_onix on November 02, 2005, 12:16:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidorQuote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.
Thats the thing, they have never admitted they are going to be behind, they always say "our graphics are going to be comparable to competitors", that "behind" you talk aout its just numbers, and even GC was "behind" in that area.
From IGN
Quote
"If you are just going to compare the spec sheets and spec numbers, Revolution may not have an equal or higher number as the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. But the fact of the matter is that if people are going to connect our machine and their machine to an ordinary TV set at home and try to compare the differences, I really don't think that they can tell such a huge difference between the machines," Iwata told G4.
Oh and, just to point out, for the GameCube the specs Nintendo put out weren't entirely meaningless. They told us that they were using soon-to-be-inadequate 1.5 gig discs, and that it could do "Real-world polygon : 6 million to 12 million polygons/second (Peak) (Assuming actual game conditions with complex models, fully textured, fully lit, etc.)"
Nintendo CAN tell us things that make sense, especially in hindsight (assuming Nintendo knew what they were talking about when they said it).
Right now, all we have is the cynical view that the Rev is going to be able to do 12 to 36 million polys-per-second, and the view taken on faith that says that the Rev is going to somehow outperform at least the Xbox360 (which, perhaps unrealistically, says it can do 500 million polys-per-second).
Post by: ShyGuy on November 02, 2005, 12:44:29 PM
Somebodys stealing polygons!
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 02, 2005, 12:52:21 PM
2) The graphical difference between the games we see will be negligible. This is possible.
3) None of this matters.
Well, there you go. That makes everyone happy.
Yes, Ian and Pale, the Rev is the weakest. Happy?
Yes, most other people, the games will look similar. Super.
Yes, cool dudes, none of this matters. We have the most fun. We win.
Post by: Arrow on November 02, 2005, 01:02:57 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 02, 2005, 01:04:31 PM
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.
"Make fake specs."
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.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 02, 2005, 01:09:38 PM
What's funny is the exact same thing happened last gen when Ninty revealed the "weak" specs of the Gamecube...Then everyone had "proof" that it was weaker when everyone can see it's NOT...If you have proof of it being weaker through both showing and not showing specs, then WHAT THE HELL? We'll be getting almost identical games visual-wise anyway so please everyone SHUT THE **** UP about specs...
Post by: Kairon on November 02, 2005, 01:36:56 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: 31 Flavas on November 02, 2005, 03:31:22 PM
QuoteBut... Specs don't matter. If everyone wants to be shallow and superficial and make judgements about the Revolution, let them.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it.
I have a dream though "where video game systems will not be judged by the color of their casing or number of polygons they can draw but by the content of their character and quality of their games." This dream started with Nintendo DS and really seems to be catching on.
Post by: Djunknown on November 02, 2005, 04:02:36 PM
Quote
If the average gamer doesn't care about specs, then what's the harm in releasing them?
This pretty much sums it up. Nintendo has taken the art of spin to a new level. I don't think even politicians spin this much, they should call up NCL for some tips! How the blue hell do you buy any electronic product and not know the specs? That's unheard of!
As mentioned earlier, they're not doing anyone any favors. Someone's going to gut their Rev, tinker with it, and release the specs online. Nintendo, in its attempt to be a control freak, will lose it what they value most.
As cliche as it sounds, it ain't the size, its how you use it! So show us! If its weak, its weak. If its another mid-level system, so be it. If you don't speak your mind, someone else will do it for you.
P.S Another reason the 'Cube was misread as the weaker system is because 3rd parties sloppily programmed for it. More often than not, 3rd party games didn't use the 'Cube to its full potenial, as opposed to Xbox. One could argue that few devs could use the full power of the PS2, but they were at worst, competent, and realistically at best, better than average.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 02, 2005, 04:25:36 PM
Yeah, well, I had the Gamecube for a good year before I decided to read up on the specific specs...
Now I really don't want to drop into just outright flaming you people but if you don't stop I will...IF SPECS ARE RELEASED, PEOPLE WILL BITCH, IF SPECS AREN'T RELEASED PEOPLE WILL BITCH!...END...OF...STORY...
Post by: KDR_11k on November 03, 2005, 05:15:48 AM
Post by: UncleBob on November 03, 2005, 06:10:15 AM
We must blow up Microsoft and Sony's HQs.
Who's with me?
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on November 03, 2005, 12:56:59 PM
Post by: denjet78 on November 03, 2005, 04:47:06 PM
So why do people care now?
MARKETING!
Sony came in and applied real marketing to the industry. As in lies, twisting the truth, saying and doing whatever it took to get the consumer to buy your product. How were honest companies (Nintendo, Sega) supposed to compete with that? In a nut shell, they couldn't. And I hope they'll never stoop to that level.
I love the idea of Nintendo not releasing specs, just stating that it's going to be on par with the other consoles graphically. There's been talk floating around that Nintendo's even developed a new graphical display method that lets relatively weak hardware display incredible graphics. No matter what happens, if the games look good, why do you care so much about what's running it? Hell, I don't even care if the games look good! I just want a crack at that new controller.
The industry is being pulled in two directions right now. One is Sony and MS' unending and unwinnable technology cold war. In the end, what will that bring? Umm... a few more polygons here and there, higher res textures? In the end, they won't matter. Technological leaps are getting smaller and smaller. Soon enough most people won't even be able to tell the difference from one generation to the next.
I'm so glad Nintendo decided to go another way, the way where we're actually going to get to play new and interesting games instead of just rehashes of last gen software with a bit of new tech paint slathered on it.
When we see Rev games we'll know whether the system can stack up graphically and if the GC is any indication Nintendo really knows what they're doing even with much weaker hardware. However, when we play Rev games... There simply isn't going to be any comparison.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 03, 2005, 06:01:42 PM
Are you kidding? It was all about the bits! The Genesis had "16 bit" printed right on it's front. The Turbo Graffix 16 had the bit number in the damn title. Although it was a huge flop the Jaguar's slogan was "Do the math" in reference to it being the first "64 bit" console. They used to make a big deal about how many megs cartridges were. Strider was the first 8 meg cartridge. It said so right on the box. The Neo-Geo had "100 meg shocker" in the intro for some of their games. Sega made a big deal about blast processing. Nintendo made a big deal about Mode 7. Part of Star Fox's promotion was on the fancy Super FX chip inside the cartridge.
Hardware wang waving has been around as long as the console wars themselves.
Post by: Arbok on November 03, 2005, 08:01:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Are you kidding? It was all about the bits! The Genesis had "16 bit" printed right on it's front. The Turbo Graffix 16 had the bit number in the damn title. Although it was a huge flop the Jaguar's slogan was "Do the math" in reference to it being the first "64 bit" console. They used to make a big deal about how many megs cartridges were. Strider was the first 8 meg cartridge. It said so right on the box. The Neo-Geo had "100 meg shocker" in the intro for some of their games. Sega made a big deal about blast processing. Nintendo made a big deal about Mode 7. Part of Star Fox's promotion was on the fancy Super FX chip inside the cartridge.
Hardware wang waving has been around as long as the console wars themselves.
Perfect summation of it, except that the origin of the "64" in Nintendo64 was grazed over as it really was the last marker of the "bit" era.
Anyway the only thing that has really changed today is that there is no longer a single marker that most companies use when they talk about power like the "bit" was... aspects like the Genesis having better sound weren't even talked about back in the day either, but it had the better graphices to tout for most of its life span so perhaps that took first and foremost priority (still amazes me, though, that the system pretty much uses a NES controller with "select" becoming "c"... kills the chance to port over any complex SNES games).
Post by: wandering on November 03, 2005, 08:50:59 PM
You guys are talking about how it doesn't matter if Nintendo doesn't release the specs because the masses will infer that the revolution is less powerful. But, you know, I think that's giving the masses too much credit. They couldn't infer that the ps2 was the weakest of the 3 consoles. And they don't seem to be picking up on the fact that the REV will be underpowered now. Nintendo's secrecy and vague marketingspeak about the REV being visually comparable and being "a jaguar inside" actually seems to be causing people to at least give them the benefit of the doubt....which is all Nintendo needs. Releasing an unimpressive spec sheet now would probably be suicide - but by the time the specs finally do get out there, and they probably will eventually, people won't care because by then they'll have seen the Rev's amazing graphics and control and it won't really matter.
Post by: Arbok on November 03, 2005, 09:14:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Nintendo's secrecy and vague marketingspeak about the REV being visually comparable and being "a jaguar inside"....
Did you have to use that quote after Atari's Jaguar had just been brought up?
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Releasing an unimpressive spec sheet now would probably be suicide...
Granted, but I wonder if Nintendo actually had to go out on record as saying they would never release them? ...although I suppose if they hadn't rumors of being way behind the other console makers would have been rampant.
Post by: wandering on November 03, 2005, 09:57:08 PM
Quote
Did you have to use that quote after Atari's Jaguar had just been brought up?
I actually hadn't thought of that.Quote
Granted, but I wonder if Nintendo actually had to go out on record as saying they would never release them? ...although I suppose if they hadn't rumors of being way behind the other console makers would have been rampant.
Yeah, if they really aren't going to release them, then it's good they're telling us that now....otherwise, people'd be waiting for them for a long time, and when they didn't show, there'd probably be some kind of nasty backlash.
Post by: UncleBob on November 04, 2005, 06:13:03 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 04, 2005, 06:42:14 AM
Well the Genesis did come out two years before the SNES. They couldn't really take into account porting from a controller that didn't exist yet, could they?
Post by: RABicle on November 05, 2005, 07:20:27 PM
L@@K!
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2005, 07:42:40 PM
Post by: RABicle on November 05, 2005, 07:44:50 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on November 06, 2005, 06:28:16 AM
Post by: 31 Flavas on November 06, 2005, 08:50:18 AM
QuoteHm... Didn't we already see this kind of debasing with the pre-launch PSP vs DS debate? The DS was shown to be woefully under spec'd to the PSP and heavily criticized for its input methods. But, we all know which system is clearly prefered now...
Originally posted by: RABicle
HAY HAY GUYZ I FOUND ALL THE SPECS ITS ACTUALLY HIDDEN ON NINTENDOS SITE LOL! THEY ARE PRITTY IMPRESSIVE
L@@K!
Post by: odifiend on November 06, 2005, 10:34:56 AM
QuoteHm... Didn't we already see this kind of debasing with the pre-launch PSP vs DS debate? The DS was shown to be woefully under spec'd to the PSP and heavily criticized for its input methods. But, we all know which system is clearly prefered now...
Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
L@@K!
Unfortunately Nintendo doesn't hold the weight in the console market they do in the handheld market. As much as people ragged on the DS, it pretty much was the next GBA and they knew they were buying it.
Post by: TMW on November 06, 2005, 12:03:33 PM
It proved itself to be a great little system, however. Thats why people are buying it.
Post by: 31 Flavas on November 06, 2005, 01:11:25 PM
QuoteAnd why can't Revolution be a "great little system" as well? The criticizims of Revolution, to me at least, seem as based in reality as the criticisims of the DS were. That is to say not at all based in reality. The only thing that mattered in the pre-release debates was that the PSP out spec'd the DS in everyway imaginable. To suggest the DS would some how survive much less compete against such technical prowess was heresy. Whats the difference between then and now with the Revoution. Im not saying that Revolution will lead the console market (it would be nice, though), but it amazes me how similar the dismissal of the Rev is to what was DS's dismissal. I think it has great potential to become as you say "a great little system" contrary to popular suggestion.
Originally posted by: TMW
It proved itself to be a great little system, however. Thats why people are buying it.
Post by: odifiend on November 06, 2005, 03:03:52 PM
Though I don't really remember anything like that, those that thought along those lines are f*ing retards. In the handheld world, Gameboy is practically always out spec'd and it has dominated for 20+ years. The moment DS had backward compatibility and a reasonable price point, it was guaranteed.
As for the Revolution, I think popular suggestion is it has amazing potential. Even the negative people mostly are addressing concerns in Nintendo's strategy (2nd console, targeting nongamers, etc...) rather than dismissing the Rev.
Post by: RABicle on November 06, 2005, 10:52:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 FlavasQuoteHm... Didn't we already see this kind of debasing with the pre-launch PSP vs DS debate? The DS was shown to be woefully under spec'd to the PSP and heavily criticized for its input methods. But, we all know which system is clearly prefered now...
Originally posted by: RABicle
HAY HAY GUYZ I FOUND ALL THE SPECS ITS ACTUALLY HIDDEN ON NINTENDOS SITE LOL! THEY ARE PRITTY IMPRESSIVE
L@@K!
While I actually ahte all of you I think I hate 31 Flavours the most.
The whole point of my spec sheet is to show you that all the crap in the PS3 and Xbox 404 columns are as meaningless as my blatherings.
Now you've made me explain it and you've ruined it I hat you all.
Post by: ruby_onix on November 06, 2005, 11:59:59 PM
Hardware makers usually present their announced specs in such a way so that they can convey some performance claims in various forms, without looking like they're bragging. (I don't really feel like writing up anything more about Nintendo and performance claims right now. Maybe later.)
But the announced specs, I feel they're important regardless. They're like... telling people the name/gender/weight of your newborn baby.
It's like, someone goes up to Shiggy and says "Awwww, what a cute widdle baby! What's it's name?" And Shiggy responds "You don't need to know that. If I told you it's name, you'd know it's gender, and then you'd prejudge my baby, and I won't let you do that." My response would be "Fine then. I was just trying to be polite, you jerk. Now I don't even wanna know your turd-spawn."
And then Shiggy goes on a rant about how his baby is gonna grow up to be the next Hitler (even though his last two attempts fell far short) and that people are already lining up to kiss it's butt, and that when the revolution finally hits, I'm gonna be sorry that I passed on the chance to kiss the butt of a baby I knew nothing about.
So what if he's short? So was Napolean. I just wanna feel like I know something about him before he becomes my leader.
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 07, 2005, 01:08:08 AM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 07, 2005, 01:52:04 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 07, 2005, 07:03:42 AM
The DS sold great at launch too though despite one of the worst launch lineups I've ever seen. It continued to sell well though the horrible post-launch drought. It took a while before it proved itself to be be a "great little system". People bought it initially because (despite Nintendo's insane attempts to prove otherwise) people saw it as the GBA followup and thus it sold well by riding on its predecessor's coattails. Now it has deserved its sales but it didn't initially. The N64 sold really well for the first year too because it was the successor to the SNES. The PS3, regardless of how well it does in the end, will sell huge initially because of the PS2 (in fact that's how the PS2 survived the first year).
The Rev doesn't have that luxury. It's coming from a position of weakness. If anything it has to fight off the stigma of its predecessor. So you can never say "well this worked okay for the DS" because they're totally different situations.
Post by: ThePerm on November 07, 2005, 08:43:58 AM
Post by: odifiend on November 07, 2005, 09:47:11 AM
Yeah, Ian's last paragraph is what i was saying. Ruby that is some serious extended metaphor.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 07, 2005, 10:37:38 AM
You don't think Revolution, assuming that it has a bad launch/drought, can't ride on the coattail of every console Nintendo game ever made?
Post by: Ian Sane on November 07, 2005, 11:15:27 AM
That's not how things work. The Cube didn't ride off the coattails of the NES or SNES. When it comes to a console purchase it's just "what have you done for me lately". The N64 was Nintendo's most recent console and that's what people thought of when the Cube came out. The Cube was largely held back by this.
When the Rev comes out the general assumption at first will be that it's another Gamecube. That's BAD. That will severely limit the Rev's potential. So that have to overcome that stigma right away. The era of Nintendo consoles being huge successes might as well be a million years ago. The Rev is the Gamecube 2 until proven otherwise.
Would you make a predicition on a sports team based on how they played ten years ago? No. You would look at last season.
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 07, 2005, 12:02:59 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on November 07, 2005, 12:35:15 PM
IIRC, people have been getting taller throughout history because taller is the predominant gene (?)
Gearheads argue over car motors, so I don't think this is much different, but most people just drive to the store and get milk.
Post by: IceCold on November 07, 2005, 12:48:58 PM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 08, 2005, 02:03:34 AM
Quote
Napoleon was 168 cm or 5' 6, not short but still not 5' 10.
I don't think Napolean was ever really "unusually" short, but he was fully aware of his height, and was oversensitive and defensive about it. So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot. Which did absolutely nothing to prevent him from being made into a laughingstock behind his back, and only fueled his widespread mockery.
Which is exactly the same sort of situation Nintendo's trying to put themselves in with this business about specs.
Quote
Gearheads argue over car motors, so I don't think this is much different, but most people just drive to the store and get milk.
This is now officially this thread's metaphor for game engines.
Quote
...for Ruby's baby!
It's not my baby, it's Shiggy's. But I understand how you could be confused, since Shiggy doesn't even wanna tell us who it's father was.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 08, 2005, 06:36:08 AM
That must have been annoying at amusement parks. "Sorry Napoleon. You can't go on this ride. It says you have to be this tal....uh talkative. Yes that's it. You don't talk enough to go on this ride."
I sort of get what Ruby means. By being so secretive and defensive Nintendo is actually making the Rev look worse. It looks almost like they're a little ashamed of it. They should be proud of their console and want to show off everything about it. By being all "oh the specs don't matter" they're drawing more attention to them.
Post by: Artimus on November 08, 2005, 07:13:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot."
That must have been annoying at amusement parks. "Sorry Napoleon. You can't go on this ride. It says you have to be this tal....uh talkative. Yes that's it. You don't talk enough to go on this ride."
I sort of get what Ruby means. By being so secretive and defensive Nintendo is actually making the Rev look worse. It looks almost like they're a little ashamed of it. They should be proud of their console and want to show off everything about it. By being all "oh the specs don't matter" they're drawing more attention to them.
If screens are impressive, doesn't that become irrelevant?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 08, 2005, 11:05:35 AM
(lol killzone)
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 08, 2005, 12:11:05 PM
), but Ian, I was referring to the games you'd be able to download onto Revolution. I don't think they should have a bad launch or a draught, but that's 200 games you can download, and I doubt anyone has played all of those games.
Post by: ThePerm on November 08, 2005, 01:06:02 PM
and i looked it up before you corrected me..he was 5'2 in french inches which is 5'6 in english inches.
still fairly average at the time...although his high gaurd were above average...so he seemed shorter. I'm 5'10 so he's as short as my brother..who I pick on all the time
Post by: mantidor on November 08, 2005, 02:45:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onixQuote
Napoleon was 168 cm or 5' 6, not short but still not 5' 10.
I don't think Napolean was ever really "unusually" short, but he was fully aware of his height, and was oversensitive and defensive about it. So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot. Which did absolutely nothing to prevent him from being made into a laughingstock behind his back, and only fueled his widespread mockery.
Which is exactly the same sort of situation Nintendo's trying to put themselves in with this business about specs.
The only case when this absurd analogy could make sense is if people released "specs" sheets about themselves and Napoleon hide them as well as himself forever. We will eventually see the games, what importance will specs have then? only annoying graphic whores and fanboys would argue this nonsense, the general public will most likely be really intrigued about the new controller, not caring at all about how many gigaflops has. Come on! its not like they will be releasing N64 graphic level games, the graphics will look good, thats all that matters given the awesome controller.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 09, 2005, 01:45:56 PM
Maybe they should just do that?
