Topic: Reggie Reveals DS, Revolution Snippets

[Avinash_Tyagi]

I think you guys are forgetting a few things...Sony has no central online plan, nintendo does, so why not harp on that fact, MS's Backwards compatibility is a joke (and Sony's isn't great either), Nintendo is going above and beyond in that avenue, why not harp on that?

The REV can play far more types of games than its competitors, and its cheaper, and its online is free, its competitors can only play the old style games, are hundreds more and online is pay to play or left up to the devs themselves, and yet all you guys can say is no HD will doom the REV.

Why are you guys harping on the one thing that Nintendo isn't doing, when its competitors have just as many, or even more flaws with their systems?

[stevey]

lol it's funny how still some dont get it. The revolution is not 3d it is has move on. What some of you are say is (put in in term of 2d - 3d) you want HD SMW in 2d over mario 64 in 3d now replace SMW with SMS and mario 64 with mario 128 so smw (in HD) or 64 (=fun)?

[King of Twitch]

so smw (in HD) or 64 (=fun)?

B-b-but Nintendo is an AND company

[Hostile Creation]

Even if my family did get an HDTV (no way), I'd still be playing on a crappy old television.  Just the way I like.
I'm unaffected, so it's fine by me.

[kennyb27]

This is actually kind of disappointing to me.  I am planning on buying an HDTV in a month or so, and I was hoping Nintendo would change their mind. But by no means is this going to change my decision to buy a Revolution.

And if I could respond to Steven's statement on the news page:

Quote
Steven says: The No-HD confirmation is a bummer, but in the end Nintendo really doesn't need it. All outputting Revolution games in HD would do is make HD comparisons to the 360 and PS3 look poorly on Nintendo.

It may make the HD comparisons bad, but now they will compare non-HD Rev games to HD PS3 and 360 games which will make the Rev games look worse.

[wandering]

 

Quote
Originally posted by: Stu L Tissimus
Also, rendering at smaller resolutions takes a *significant* load off of the GPU. So, basically, restricting Revolution to smaller resolutions (lol teh rhymes) will actually give it potentially better framerates, if not better texture quality and shaders.

....Which is exactly why this isn't such a bad move. If HD was an option on the REV, there's no way that the big devs would make games on ps3 and 360 hi-def while not doing the same on revolution. And, in making games on the rev hi-def, they'd ensure that games would look worse on the rev, because the rev will be weakest of the 3 consoles and it probably won't have enough power to make games look comparable to the competition's and be in HD.

I don't think this is a big deal as far as consumer's are concerned. Nintendo seems to have learned some things from Sony -they're doing a pretty good job of creating the impression that the Revolution will be powerful/high-tech/hi-def TV compatable, even though it'll be the weakest of the 3 consoles. And impression is all that matters...since, you know, most consumers don't actually have HD sets, and most won't be able to tell the difference between rev's graphics and the compeition's.

I think the biggest potentilal hurdle is how the rev will look in store-demos. On it's own, I think the rev games will look good in widescreen progressive scan mode on HDTVS. But, when put right next to hd-equipped ps3 and 360 units, rev's lower-res visuals probably won't stack up even in the eyes of average non-gamers. .....unless the rev's visual presentation is somehow as unique as it's controller, which Nintendo has certainly hinted at.

 

[KDR_11k]

I don't think there'll be much of a visible difference between the Rev at standard resolution and the X360 at medium resolution. And if there is, the customer will be disappointed when he takes the system home, plugs it in and finds that his TV is not HD.