Topic: 2-3 Times as powerful as GC true, sez IGN

[wandering]

ah- this is fun. It's sort of a relief to have those specs out there. I mean, really, real information! Kind of.

Though it's going to be really annoying to hear people bitching about this for the next 6 months or so. Because, for all the hoopla, I'm still convinced that Nintendo was right when they said the graphics would be on par with the competition's. Standard-def graphics + much more familiar hardware + magical Nintendo hardware design that perfectly balances and utilizes the hardware's components to their fullest = amazing looking games.

...Which is why I'm annoyed that ign has released this info. Nintendo knew that spec numbers would be misinterpreted, and that's why they didn't want to release them until after games were shown. Not that it's ign's job to be a propaganda machine for Nintendo (even though the other channels are propaganda machines for their respective consoles...)

In any case, now that this is out there, Nintendo should totally release a single amazing "concept shot" of next-gen mario or something, just to stem criticism.

[PaLaDiN]

"the problem is alot of us want a next gen system..if it doenst look enough better...then they should have just sold a new controller for gamecube."

Oh good, this is golden. So! Are you going to tell me next that Xbox360 looks enough better? What's Microsoft's defense for having graphics that fail to impress on every level except for rich people who delude themselves that it looks a whole lot better on their expensive TVs? They don't even have a controller to show off, what have they got to hide behind? Have they seriously fooled you that easily with their meaningless specs?

[Nephilim]

"Well, I'm not sure about this, you'd need to ask an X360 expert but I remember reading that the X360 was originally slated to have only 256 mb of RAM and was fine at that level, and that it was upped to 512 very late in its research cycle for no other reason than that Microsoft could use it as a more impressive selling point."

This is not true, They upped it to increase pc ports
Nornal rec. ram these days is 512
With 3gig of ram becoming a reality next year (1.5 being released), It is a very smart choice, and the rec will proberly increase to 1gig for most big budget games around the same time

[KDR_11k]

1. It's illegal for developers to talk about NDAd information, keep that in mind.

2. Define "2-3 times as powerful". Before my last upgrade my PC had a 1.53GHz Athlon XP, 512MB RAM and a Radeon 8500 (64MB). Now it has a 1.8 GHz Athlon 64, 1024MB RAM and a GeForce 6800 (128MB). How many times more powerful is my system compared to its previous configuration?

3. Diminishing returns apply to component pricing. A 900MHz CPU won't save more than a few cents compared to a 1.5GHz CPU. A GPU on par with a GeForce 1 would cost more in production overhead than actual performance. A 20GB harddrive is generally nuts when it comes to pricing, you're paying for the mechanism and case, the platters would cost next to nothing. If Nintendo really uses a system with less than 128MB RAM and a 900MHz CPU they're being stupid as a tenner more would easily double the specs. Never mind that it's idiotic to design a completely new chip that doesn't perform better or cost less than a run-off-the-mill standard chip (production volumes would be smaller for a custom chip so prices are higher).

I remember reading that the X360 was originally slated to have only 256 mb of RAM and was fine at that level, and that it was upped to 512 very late in its research cycle for no other reason than that Microsoft could use it as a more impressive selling point.

It was upped because Sony said they'd go with 512MB and devs were complaining to MS.

RAM is needed the coming gen because not only will resolutions for textures increase (have you ever played Unreal Tournament 2004? You can run up to a wall and it won't blur! Compare that to Metroid Prime), there will be four times as many textures per surface (diffuse, spec, normal, misc (material type map to display proper impacts in case of Quake 4)). RAM is also needed because level sizes in the current console gen have been constrained by RAM sizes and streaming isn't an option for everyone. Hell, with enough RAM RPGs could keep all the battle data in memory while you're on the field so the transition is instanteous. More RAM; means larger chunks of the world available at once, larger draw distances and more detailed world states (i.e. monsters will remain active when you're not there and won't respawn when you leave the room and reenter).

[mantidor]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k

3. Diminishing returns apply to component pricing. A 900MHz CPU won't save more than a few cents compared to a 1.5GHz CPU. A GPU on par with a GeForce 1 would cost more in production overhead than actual performance. A 20GB harddrive is generally nuts when it comes to pricing, you're paying for the mechanism and case, the platters would cost next to nothing. If Nintendo really uses a system with less than 128MB RAM and a 900MHz CPU they're being stupid as a tenner more would easily double the specs. Never mind that it's idiotic to design a completely new chip that doesn't perform better or cost less than a run-off-the-mill standard chip (production volumes would be smaller for a custom chip so prices are higher).

Thats one of the reason I find those specs highly not true, I really dont think Nintendo went to IBM and ATI and told them to made "double" the clock speed, they told them to make a solution in a specific price range with the best technology available for such price, and as you said, using 900Mhz  instead of 1.5GHz wouldnt be saving a lot of money at all. The decision of how fast should the processor be its completly up to IBM, and I dont think they have made a 1GHz processor, do they even make those anymore?  

[ShyGuy]

If these components are truly underpowered, why go through the trouble of having IBM and ATI design a new CPU and GPU? If they are just upgrades of the Gamecube chips, wouldn't they be out to the developers by now?

I think I'm going to have to see some screenshots/movies before I form an opinion on whether or not Nintendo is underpowering the revolution.

[BigJim]

Also, doubling clock speed isn't the same as doubling performance since they don't scale so literally.  All else being equal, a 2 GHz CPU might only be 60% faster than a 1GHz chip in real-world performance. And it gets worse the higher up you go.

2x the performance could easily mean anywhere up to 1.5GHz, for example. They do make those PPCs still.

Edit: And whether or not we agree with IGNs information on a technical level, or whether we even like it or not, the point is clear. Nintendo is decidedly going in the opposite direction of the competition. Sony and MS are making insanely expensive hardware. Nintendo is making Rev so cheap it's almost an impulse buy.

[mantidor]

Exactly, Im sure that the Rev wont be comparable "numerically" so to speak with 360 and ps3, but those numbers given are just bizarre.

[Dirk Temporo]

Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
http://xfersf06.ign.com/^1606475555/movies/cubemovies.ign.com/docroot/media/previews/video/metroid4/metroid4fmv.mpg?position=front

"Considering everything we know, the above link represents the what the graphical abilities are of Nintendo's Next-Generation console, Codenamed: Revolution."

Although I just found the old SpaceWorld2000 video of Metriod Prime, more ram and better(bump) texture processing should lead you to games that look just a tad bit better this. If this is the case, then I will be more than happy.

Uh. Your link doesn't work.

[odifiend]

It worked for me (yesterday).  It is just Spaceworld 2000 Metroid.

[couchmonkey]

Well, I've had some time to cool off and get over the initial shock.  I'm still not happy about the launch date, but the power doesn't bother me as much anymore, though I do worry that it will affect third party support.  Anyway, now I'm interested in seeing some actual screenshots and videos.  I want to know what the games are really going to look like, because the system IS more powerful than the GameCube, and that's exciting.  I wonder just how it will compare to the Xbox and Xbox 360?

ThePerm:  I don't see how more RAM equals better gameplay.  The problem with Nintendo's titles this generation had way more to do with rushing the games than RAM, in my opinion.  Super Mario Sunshine and Zelda were both pumped out "on schedule" instead of spending an extra few months to get more levels in there.

I also think people's standards were raised.  I think a lot of people had ramped-up expectations because the Nintendo 64 delivered such amazing 3D re-imaginings of its classic games.  For me, it's no surprise that Super Mario Sunshine can't live up to the rush I felt the first time I played Super Mario 64...because it's not a totally new experience.  Neither was Super Mario World!  I also think a lot of us have a more critical eye than we used to - my guess is that a lot of people here grew up on NES and/or Super NES, like me.  Looking back, Super Mario World could be considered "disapointing" compared to SMB3, but I didn't notice as much back then as I do now, because I've spent an extra 14 years becoming intimately familiar with video games.

[mantidor]

I really think that GC and xbox graphics are prefectly comparable and almost equal.

[trip1eX]

AT $150 I would be instantly sold.  AT $99 I'd take two.  The specs are low but they are twice the power of the Gamecube which ain't bad.  I hope they also work on cutting down load times.  

It's more and more apparent that the REv is the DS and the 360/PS3 combo is the PSP in the upcoming next-gen console battle.  

[Don'tHate742]

Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
It worked for me (yesterday).  It is just Spaceworld 2000 Metroid.

Wow...the debate was heated for a while.

I won't get into the nitty-gritty right now, but I will say this.

If the REV graphics looked like that Metriod vid and that Zelda vid....I'd be pleased.

[Bill Aurion]

Why do people like that shiny FMV garbage? =\

Twilight Princess looks loads better than the SW2000 video!

[Ian Sane]

"The controller is the very answer to how Nintendo was underwhelming with Sunshine, with Double Dash and with Wind Waker. Nintendo foundered this generation because they suddenly hit a brick wall in terms of user interface and what they could do with it."

I don't think it had anything to do with the interface but entirely due to a few things.  Nintendo didn't go online which is was the next logical step in game development.  Case in point Double Dash tries to be innovative with a two driver design but it didn't really take off.  Mario Kart DS however plays more like the classic Mario Kart games but added online play, which was the next logical step for multiplayer game, and it is universally loved.  If Nintendo wasn't so stubborn about online gaming they could have had a whole new feature to work with.

Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker's shortcoming were mostly due to a lack of polish.  People complained that N64 games were few and far between.  The real complaint was "your third party support sucks" but Nintendo misinterpreted that and instead rushed their games.  Typical out-of-touch Nintendo solution.

I think they hit a brick wall in the sense that with the Cube Nintendo suddenly got the idea that their franchises were what made them special and they pumped out an insane amount of sequels and spinoffs that no one really needed.  What the hell was the point of making another Mario Golf when the original was so perfect?  There wasn't.  How do you justify making another Paper Mario?  I thought the sequel was great but it was just more of the same and I got bored of it.  In their peak Nintendo rarely made redundant games; almost everything was essential.  If they couldn't justify another sequel it didn't get made.  On the Cube when Nintendo went away from milking sequels they made brilliant games.  Pikmin is fantastic and Pikmin 2 is the type of essential sequel they used to stick to.  Metroid Prime was fresh and exciting.  As was Animal Crossing though technically it was originally an N64 game.  I was rarely underwhelmed when Nintendo tried something new.  Even Luigi's Mansion, though short, was fresh and entertaining while it lasted.  It was just a lousy choice for the flagship title.

Although the remote and the DS touchscreen provide new interfaces I feel they are a "requirement" only in the sense that Nintendo has hit a brick wall regarding franchise spinoffs and needs to make up a new tool to freshen up unneeded Mario spinoff #27.  I think if they made more of an effort to create new franchises they would find that the traditional controller with the added option of online gaming, which will at least justify new entries in all of their multiplayer focus franchises, will allow them to innovate.  They have to stop thinking in franchises and think in individual games.  I can think of dozens of ideas for games with the traditional controller and I'm not a developer.  Nintendo SHOULD be able to think of more ideas than I.  There's no need to force a sequel.  If one works, do it, and if not then don't.  Now they shouldn't abandon franchises completely.  They just need to create new ones to replace the stale ones and have a steady cycle of the new replacing the old.  A new idea can become a huge franchise.

I think the problem though is that we fans always demand more sequels to the games we like, even if there really is no need for the series to continue.  People have asked for another Punch-Out for years even though anyone who has played it knows that Super Punch-Out is perfect.  So thus Nintendo feels pressure to deliver follow-ups to everything which eats up resources and limits the amount of brand new stuff they can work on.  The only way to deliver all the sequels while making something new is to create a totally different controller.

[BigJim]

Taking a step back for a sec, Ian and Bill were debating what Nintendo did wrong this gen and what will be fixed with Revolution. One of the major mistakes not mentioned was the lack of acceptance from older gamers. Nintendo has done horribly in this regard. All they did was produce a handful of token mature games. What's sad is that this reputation has now haunted them for 15 years and counting, since Sega exposed it in the 16-bit days, and they still haven't provided an answer. Reggie has even said Nintendo was "proud" of this reputation. Ugh.

Nintendo *talked* a big game about also being for mature gamers this generation, and we saw exactly how small their bite really was. They practically didn't even show up. There's plenty of *talk* that this controller is the next big thing for FPS's or survival horror, but the proof will be in the pudding. The potential could be significant, but we don't yet know if Nintendo is really going to stand up and be counted.

Since adults make up a huge part of the gaming audience now, to be ignored by them or to ignore them at this point is stupid and deadly. This cheap price won't help the perception, so it's up to content to make the difference. Token games that demonstrate the controller won't be enough. They need to make a Halo-sized impact to even begin to prove Nintendo can hang with adults too.

This is a huge uphill battle, and Nintendo hasn't yet proven their interest in changing that perception. Make MP3 or some new IP the new Halo of first person gaming, then maybe there’s a chance that more mature-style developers will take notice and climb aboard. Until then, their own reputation remains a handicap.

I don’t mean to change the flow of the discussion, but it was something I wanted to mention back on page 3 but didn’t get to until now.  

[Spak-Spang]

I believe there is alot of misconception about Nintendo and mature gamers.

Nintendo never did neglect mature gamers.  They just had a different view of what made a mature game.  

Nintendo believes games like Zelda Wind Waker, Mario Sunshine, and Mario Kart should be considered mature games, that are also friendly to all ages.  All those games had significant challenge that is addequate for all age games, even the hardcore.

Nintendo has never neglected mature games.  Mature games just have become jaded and believe unless its rated M then it must be for kids.  Which is stupid.  

Ian earlier you said that Nintendo lied about the Gamecube online plans.  We don't know if that is true.  Nintendo has obviously been working on the Nintendo Wifi for several years...probably since early Gamecube years.  Now, I believe Nintendo was hoping to have an infrastructure up and ready sometime in Gamecube's lifecycle, but later decided it wasn't financially worth it that late in  the game.  Obviously, I have no proof of that.  But you don't have proof that Nintendo outright lied either.  They had to be working on things...otherwise we wouldn't have the advanced infrastructure we have forming for the DS and Revolution.

[BigJim]

If Sunshine, WW, and Kart are Nintendo's idea of mature games.... "Wow." Alternative universe stuff there. They'd be the only ones that believe it.

What you're describing is their classic "everybody" style. Mature games aren't meant to be for everybody.  It doesn't have to be an M-rating. It's a combination of things from art style, to music, mood, context and content.

The widely accepted ideals of what mature games are is absolutely lacking on GameCube.

[odifiend]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Since adults make up a huge part of the gaming audience now, to be ignored by them or to ignore them at this point is stupid and deadly. This cheap price won't help the perception, so it's up to content to make the difference. Token games that demonstrate the controller won't be enough. They need to make a Halo-sized impact to even begin to prove Nintendo can hang with adults too.

This is a huge uphill battle, and Nintendo hasn't yet proven their interest in changing that perception. Make MP3 or some new IP the new Halo of first person gaming, then maybe there’s a chance that more mature-style developers will take notice and climb aboard. Until then, their own reputation remains a handicap.

Nintendo's image has definitely worsened with regards to adults but if you remember, the N64 had no problem hanging with adults in the beginning.  Everybody was playing GoldenEye.  It wasn't until later when the N64 had a stream of entirely in house developed games that the 'mature' audience left.  'Mature' audiences are not hard to capture.  A killer launch FPS is all you need and these people will flock.  The potential is there and I'm really hoping Nintendo is doing something exclusive with Free Radical or that Game Zero might make an appearance.

[JonLeung]

I'd have to disagree.  At least about the redundancy of sequels.  Nintendo isn't as guilty of cookie-cutter sequels as others.  They have a lot of games, yes, but the games are often different enough.

Mario has his spin-offs, but I think Mario's actual adventures are slowing down, if we don't count his RPGs.  Three games on the NES, two on the Super NES, one on the N64...and most people (including myself) are hesitant to want to count Sunshine.  It was a good game, but it didn't feel like a full Mario game being limited in locale.  So it's like half a game.  (Next, we may only get a quarter of a game...)  Not all changes are popular, but the inclusion of FLUDD was an attempt to create a different sort of Mario platformer.  I'll admit that Mario Party is getting redundant, but that's probably why they included a microphone in the last two iterations and 8-player in the latest one.

Metroid entered 3D, and then included a light/dark world dynamic.  Sure, it's been seen in other games like The Legend Of Zelda: A Link To The Past and the Silent Hill series and others, but it also had completely new Suits.  Yes, the multi-player was lackluster, I'll admit that.

Link has had the most 3D games, four compared to Mario and Samus's two each.  So by the time Wind Waker was to come around there was already Ocarina Of Time and the unique-3-days-system from Majora's Mask.  The most obvious difference in Wind Waker was its cel-shaded look, but the game also had sailing.  I personally didn't like the sailing, it took too long most of the time, but it was an additional gameplay element nonetheless.  And Twilight Princess has the werewolf thing going on.  One thing about Zelda games is curious; everyone (who isn't a major fan) thinks it's always about Link saving Zelda from Ganon, but until Wind Waker, every game introduced a new villain (that is, if you count Ganon/Agahnim/Ganondorf as separate) and the games come in pairs, it seems, with one game in each pair not involving Ganon (or one of his other forms) as the final boss.  So it only happens half the time, which is as close to never as always, technically.  I think it's the Ganon ones that sell better, but that's (kind of) beside the point.

I think my original point was that Nintendo hasn't hit a brick wall when it comes to coming up with something actually new in sequels.  I think the thing is that consumers care less about the characters and situations regardless.  Especially those that are more plot-based than gameplay-based.  I probably went off on a tangent there, but I would agree with Ian's last point in the particular regard that the controller will add "newness" to continuing franchises, and this difference is more immediately evident than Samus finding herself in two intertwined worlds, for example.

I just hope I'm not playing the exact same games by flicking my wrist up instead of pressing A to jump, but as I pointed out, Nintendo should still be capable of coming up with new things in sequels.

[Stimutacs Addict]

well said. the only thing that would bother me about these specs is the possibility that we wont get a true next-gen Pikmin. you know, Online Co-op where each player can have nearly 500 pikmin in battle.   (actually if you marched 500 pikmin through the typical level you'll lose about 50 on every bridge, narrow pathway, etc.)

anyways, if this launches at $200 without the shell controller and a game I might be pissed. I want $150. $200 w/ Smash Bros.
but this worries me --- they need to keep load times down. We play SSB:M all day (my dorm room is a vortex) and I love how there's never more than a 2-3 second load time before battles. I hope Ninty can keep access times down.

Also they need to know that they are walking the fine line between gaming console and one of those shifty TV games like baseball or golf, or even that thing that you draw on and then it shows up on the TV.

[JonLeung]

Wow, the conversation moved on while I wasted my time with that post.

The whole "maturity" thing is really hard to define, and unfortnately is best described with a combination of societal perceptions.  You can say a game's mature if the ESRB gives it an M or higher.  You can say that's not the case, since that's too literal, but at the same time based on one organization's perception.  You can say that games like Conker are IMmature, considering its content.  Like fart jokes would really win you much respect in a truly mature setting.  But then you could say the game is mature because only mature gamers can play it without carrying that immaturity out of the game.  Etc.  Personally I think it's stupid if people think they're more mature because they're beating up a prostitute instead of saving Dream Land.

It's not limited to genres, either, but for the typical-not-so-bright-consumers, it would help if Nintendo (or a second-party) could get an exclusive FPS ready for the Revolution right at launch.  The controller is practically asking for it.  Who would want to play FPSes with a two-handed gamepad (which would probably feel clunky after handling the Revolution remote controller) when you can do it so much easier and feel more involved when playing them on the Revolution?  

[Ian Sane]

"One of the major mistakes not mentioned was the lack of acceptance from older gamers. Nintendo has done horribly in this regard. All they did was produce a handful of token mature games."

I've noticed that when Nintendo doesn't want to do something, but is being bugged about it, they blatantly half-ass it.  Like if they throw us a few bones we'll shutup.  It is REALLY obvious that Nintendo doesn't want to make mature games which is why we always get a lacklustre effort from them.  It's the same thing with sports games.  It's the same thing with demo discs (Nintendo has never really done much with the concept).  It was the same thing with online play.  Thankfully that was only something they temporarily didn't want to do but on the Cube it was like "we're not interested in this so we're not going to help anyone else use this feature.  Oh the fans want it.  We'll just throw them a few LAN games and hopefully they'll shutup."  It's a very big problem because it scares people away.  Sadly Nintendo doesn't realize that third party support is the solution to the problem.  Nintendo doesn't have to make games they don't want to if third parties fill in the gaps for them.  But since Nintendo typically just makes a few token third party deals and not much else I think they don't care about that issue either.  As long as their games sell and they make a profit who cares.

That's why I'm so sceptical about this "Nintendo is an 'and' company" stuff because they've said the same thing about mature games and it was a half-assed effort.  If Nintendo truly is focused on non-gamers and on being everyone's secondary console then they're not going to make any serious effort to appeal to hardcore gamers.

"I think it's the Ganon ones that sell better, but that's (kind of) beside the point."

I think the Ganon ones sell better because they're always the first one released.  When the first Zelda game is released there is still hope that Nintendo's console will be a serious competitor.  When the second one is released everone already knows the console is a "failure" and thus there's less interest.  That's how it works for the 3D ones anyway.

"Nintendo isn't as guilty of cookie-cutter sequels as others."

I agree.  But by Nintendo standards they've fallen big time.  Plus when Capcom releases cookie-cutter sequels it doesn't matter because they don't provide 90% of the major games for a console by themselves.  You don't notice when a third party does it or Sony and MS does it because there's enough other new stuff on the PS2 and Xbox that you don't care.

[JonLeung]

Nintendo's a business.  As much as we want it to be about games, for them, it's also about the bottom line.

Why make mature games when they typically don't sell as well as E-rated games?  If PokĂ©mon and Mario sell, why not continue with those?  The GTA games are among the very few exceptions.

Sure, there IS room and demand for M-rated games, and at least T-rated things that sell well like the Final Fantasy games.  I think that the solution is not for Nintendo themselves to make games, but to entice the third-party developers that do so.

The controller is a good first step, at least for those who want to make creative games and not more GTA clones.

And yes, those developers are businesses too.

It's always about balancing creativity and cash flow, isn't it?