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

[Artimus]

That doesn't look plasticy so much as obviously and totally fake. The enviroments not su much, but the character is a totally fakery.

[KDR_11k]

Well, yes, that's intended or I wouldn't have gone for the anime style.

[Don'tHate742]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rhoq

Quote
Originally posted by: mjbd

Quote
I have been trying to figure out what Rev games will look like, and this is what I have come up with.  Take elements of games from this generation, the best textures from this game, the best effects from this game, best character models from that game, and so on.  I see Rev being able to incoperate all these things into one package.

RE4 and LOZ:TP are perfect examples of what the Revolution's graphics will look like at the very least.

*drools*

I honestly don't see why people care about graphics so much. I remember playing Mario 64 for the first time, and the BEST thing about it was controlling Mario. Seeing Mario do back-flips, crawl, climb trees, swim, side-jump, wall-jump, and so on, made me want the game badly. Graphics be damned. That game could of been ugly as hell and I still would of bought it. So, what's the difference today? If Nintendo comes out with the next Mario 64, who will honestly care about its graphics?

I think we all feel the pressure to "like" graphics because Sony and Microsoft keep shoving it down our throats. Imagine if Sony and Microsoft didn't care about graphics, instead, they focused their time on gameplay. Wouldn't the game industry be roughly a billion times better? Wouldn't we be arguing over how great a game is and not what specs the system can push?

Some of you need to take a step back and look at the situation. Graphics don't make Gameplay....GAMEPLAY. It is the only thing a game needs, everything thing else is just icing on the cake.

The REV will be able to provide new and creative games. Every popular game today, can be made better and more intuitive with the REV's control. Games that could have never existed, can only exist on the REV. And best of all, the possibilities of games are endless.

Doesn't that make it a winner, in our books, by defualt?

[JonLeung]

Until games are playable, it's hard to rate things on gameplay.

You can look at screenshots and, assuming they aren't faked too much, you get an idea what the graphics are like.  It's harder for you to point at a still shot and go "there's some fine gameplay right there".  Even a video may not do justice.

And even if you could, there's a lack of screenshots or videos of anything remotely related to the Revolution at the moment.  All that people can go on are supposed specs of power even though most probably don't know what it all means.

Ideally, yes, gameplay would be the best indicator of how factually "good" a game is.  But it's hard to quantify and it's hard to point out.  In a shallow consumer culture where people are wowed by how sleek, stylish, sexy, and spectacular something can be, it's hard to sell something on a deeper level alone.

At least the Revolution itself is pretty sleek and stylish.  The gameplay just by the controller alone is already unique, so hopefully there'll be lots of demo stations set up and commercials that let people understand what it is.  I think there are some people who don't even understand the DS commercials...

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Twilight Princess is a Cube game and thus is NO indication of what the Rev will offer.  The Cube wasn't designed with non-gamers as a focus (in fact the very concept didn't really exist) and it has a normal controller.  Metroid Prime 3 is just a name thrown out.  We know nothing about it so we can't say what it is or isn't yet.

Bull...If Nintendo wasn't interested in creating such titles they wouldn't be making TP as it is...They didn't go "Oh, we're not going to make any more long games so let's just make this last one anyway for the Gamecube."  STUPID LOGIC...Try looking at the DS, please...Created with non-gamers in mind yet the games for the hardcore crowd still exist...Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, Brain Training, and Mario Kart can ALL FREAKING EXIST AT THE SAME TIME!  THINKING IT WON'T BE THE SAME FOR REVOLUTION IS STUPID, END OF STORY! >=O

[Rhoq]

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion

Try looking at the DS, please...Created with non-gamers in mind yet the games for the hardcore crowd still exist...Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, Brain Training, and Mario Kart can ALL FREAKING EXIST AT THE SAME TIME!  THINKING IT WON'T BE THE SAME FOR REVOLUTION IS STUPID, END OF STORY! >=O

Excellent point, Bill. I think the DS is definitely a gauge for what the Revolution experience will be like. Due to the DS' unique features, interactive gameplay designs, never before possible have been achieved thanks to the touch screen and built-in microphone. The Revolution will be bringing that same level of interactivity (and more) to your TV.

Anyways, to get back on topic a bit...I have no problem with the Revolution being the least-powered system of the 3. I accept that the recent developer reports of the system being approximately twice as powerful as the GameCube are most likely accurate. Knowing what the GameCube is already capable of calms any fears, because I know without a doubt that the Revolution will be adequate for my gaming needs. However, less matured gamers will probably tear the Revolution apart.

[Ian Sane]

"They didn't go 'Oh, we're not going to make any more long games so let's just make this last one anyway for the Gamecube.'"

Different target demographics.  It makes no sense to make short simple games on the Cube because it's already established as a "gamer's console".  Non-games wouldn't sell.  You use the DS as an example a lot but to me the DS is exactly what I'm afraid the Rev will be like.  Sure there are some hardcore gamer games but they're much more rare than they were on the GBA.  In fact until Advance Wars came out there was pretty much nothing.  With the DS Nintendo's releases are split between non-gamer and traditional and as a result the library is pretty slim.  If the Rev is like that then I can see why a company like SK, which is not about making non-gamer games at all, would leave Nintendo.  When they joined with Nintendo the two companies philosophies were in sync.  Once Nintendo started focusing on non-gamers they weren't and thus they left.  Maybe that's just a convenient excuse but if I was in their situation I would leave too.  I'm not interested in non-games and thus wouldn't want to exclusively support a console that specifically targets non-gamers.

Yeah both types of games exist on the DS but for a hardcore gamer the library is comprimised.  Why go for a console where you have to compete for the console maker's attention when you can go somewhere else where you have their full attention?  This is especially important for a developer.  SK can consider the entire X360 userbase as their potential market.  They would never be able to do that with the Rev.  There's no way to tell which part of the userbase is non-gamer and thus not a target.

I kind it funny that when the Xbox 360 screens first showed up so many of us complained that it didn't look much different than this gen.  Yet it's very likely that the Rev will follow the same path only even worse yet that's okay.  It's alright for Nintendo to have something that looks like it's from last-gen but not MS or Sony.  Graphics aren't all that matters and I guess the logic is that Sony and MS don't have nifty new controllers but strictly in terms of graphics don't say that the Rev graphics will be fine if the X360 graphics weren't good enough for you.  I'm not a graphics whore but I like to see a noticable change when I buy a new console.  There has to be more than just the controller for me to buy a new console.  Otherwise they might as well make it available both a standalone and a Cube upgrade.

[ABlueflameA]

I'd be happy with graphics slightly better than gamecube, but with much better draw distances. maybe thats just me?
-Blueflame

[Bill Aurion]

"Yeah both types of games exist on the DS but for a hardcore gamer the library is comprimised. Why go for a console where you have to compete for the console maker's attention when you can go somewhere else where you have their full attention?"

A "compromised library" has really taken a hit on the DS, let me tell you!  And this "competing for attention" has completely failed Ninty in the past and there's absolutely NO way they could possibly gain back a Halo or GTA audience from MS and Sony, but you don't seem to realize this...Ninty will be keeping their userbase, plus gaining those that have never gamed before and those that want to try something new...THEY ARE NOT COMPETING FOR THE SAME USERBASE AS MICROSOFT AND SONY!  If they did they would LOSE, PERIOD!  Stop making up this crap that Ninty needs to fix mistakes because your strategy is just instant death trying to compete with companies that cliche more with that group...Ninty has their own cliche, will add more to their cliche, and will thrive...They have gained the most profit of any of the three companies so I think they know what they are doing, thank you very much...

I kind it funny that when the Xbox 360 screens first showed up so many of us complained that it didn't look much different than this gen. Yet it's very likely that the Rev will follow the same path only even worse yet that's okay.

Wow, you didn't really think before typing this, eh?  360 has nothing going for it besides graphics...GRAPHICS ARE THE FREAKING SELLING POINT!  Revolution's selling point is not the graphics and Ninty has stated this time and time again!  GAH!

[KnowsNothing]

You answered your own question in that last paragirraffe, it's because Nintendo has a "nifty new control scheme" that mediocre graphics will be fine.  The Xbox 360 doesn't HAVE that new controller, it's trying to open the new generation by graphics alone, and it's failing.  For a system that's supposed to focus on power, it's been extremely underwhelming so far.

So yes, the Rev graphics will be fine, but the 360's aren't good enough for me.

edit: hi bill

[Don'tHate742]

Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Until games are playable, it's hard to rate things on gameplay.

You can look at screenshots and, assuming they aren't faked too much, you get an idea what the graphics are like.  It's harder for you to point at a still shot and go "there's some fine gameplay right there".  Even a video may not do justice.

And even if you could, there's a lack of screenshots or videos of anything remotely related to the Revolution at the moment.  All that people can go on are supposed specs of power even though most probably don't know what it all means.

Ideally, yes, gameplay would be the best indicator of how factually "good" a game is.  But it's hard to quantify and it's hard to point out.  In a shallow consumer culture where people are wowed by how sleek, stylish, sexy, and spectacular something can be, it's hard to sell something on a deeper level alone.

At least the Revolution itself is pretty sleek and stylish.  The gameplay just by the controller alone is already unique, so hopefully there'll be lots of demo stations set up and commercials that let people understand what it is.  I think there are some people who don't even understand the DS commercials...

Well now you see why Nintendo wants people to play and watch at the same time. Like you said, proving gameplay through vids and screens isn't possible.

Ian, you can bitch all you want right now, but mark my words: Once there are actual playable demos for the REV, you will careless about what the games looks like. That's the key....

[Artimus]

Can someone please explain to me how the DS library is compromised? By WHAT? Nintendogs? Nintendogs is a game. Maybe it's aimed at non-gamers but it's definitely not out of place...Hey You! Pikachu didn't compromise the N64's library. Or maybe Electroplancton did the compromising? Its one person dev team really drained resources from other people...

The GBA, in five years, has 14 games over 90% on GameRankings, and another 15 over 85%. The DS has 3 games over 90% and another 11 over 6 over 85%, despite being out 1/5 the time.  That means the ratio for the two systems having quality games is roughly the same, or slightly better for the DS. Thats with developers having to experiment! If you look at the first 6 months compared to the last 6 months, all but TWO of the highly rated games have come out recently. That means the numbers will more than likely grow even faster now. How in ANY WAY is that compromised?

Ian, you always say Nintendo needs to do so and so and so and so, and yet when they release Mario Kart to sell over 1,000,000 copies, while also selling 1,000,000 copies of a wholly new series, you say they're compromising! I can't even think of any other "non-games" that are coming out soon besides Electroplancton! Oh, I forgot, they're releasing a Brain Flex game that took like...no resources to develop. Versus Prime Hunters, an original sports title, and a brand new platformer starring Peach.

MAKES NO SENSE MORON.  

[Ian Sane]

"And this 'competing for attention' has completely failed Ninty in the past and there's absolutely NO way they could possibly gain back a Halo or GTA audience from MS and Sony"

You misinterpreted what I said.  I don't mean anything regarding MS and Sony in that arguement.  I mean us, existing gamers in the Nintendo userbase, now have to compete with non-gamers for Nintendo's attention.  Originally 100% of the games made for a Nintendo console were built with gamers in mind.  Now that's not the case so we're going to get like 70% or maybe even 50% or lower.  It's like the amount of games available is shrinking.

Though I don't really see the difference between Nintendo gamers and Sony or MS gamers.  To me I just see gamers and I feel Nintendo scares them off mostly due to incompetance and screwing up simple stuff that seemingly no one could screw up.  I've always felt that not screwing stuff up is the key to Nintendo reclaming market share because then they're on even footing and it all comes down to who has the better games which gives Nintendo a big advantage.

And regarding the graphics issue I would consider it a knock against both consoles for the graphics being underwhelming.

[Artimus]

Oh, and I went through the GBA releases. In the first year these were the major first party titles:

Super Mario Advance
F-Zero
Mario Kart: SC
Advance Wars
Golden Sun
Mario Advance 2

Versus on the DS:

Mario 64
Wario Ware Touch!
Kirby: CC
Advance Wars DS
Nintendogs
Mario Kart DS
Mario & Luigi
Metroid Prime Pinball
Animal Crossing DS

DS wins 9 to 6. And even if we remove non-game Nintendogs and Animal Crossing and small-title Pinball, they're tied. The DS probably fares better anyway, because the GBA had two ports.

Saying the DS is less focused on gamers than ANY other handheld ever, is just flat out wrong.

[Ian Sane]

"Saying the DS is less focused on gamers than ANY other handheld ever, is just flat out wrong."

I never would say that.  Game.com?  N-Gage?  PSP?  The DS beats those by miles.

[BigJim]

Quote
Ninty has their own cliche, will add more to their cliche, and will thrive...They have gained the most profit of any of the three companies so I think they know what they are doing, thank you very much...

This point and similar ones are brought up regularly. Every time I see this retort I kind of scratch my head. Ian is making a point from a customer's standpoint. Non-games aren't his thing. They're not really my thing either. The defense for this always seems to basically be, "it's best for Nintendo. It's best for Nintendo" bringing it back to Nintendo like it's only about their own betterment. Are you a shareholder? Are you with Golin-Harris or some other PR firm they work with? Are you a sheep repeating the PR message?

What's best for Nintendo isn't necessarily what's best for all of their customers. As an "everybody" company that dips their wick in every pool, they haven't proven they can keep "everybody" happy in the process. If I ever again have to wait over a year between games I want to play, then I (and customers like me) are within reasonable logic to just say "screw you" and find a better alternative... along with the majority of the market that apparently already has.

The difference is there are people like me that WANT Nintendo to be enough for them for any number of reasons. Be it for their IPs, overall quality, emotional attachment to the brand, or whatever. We're all fans and we all want more of what we like. Not getting it can leave customers hungry. And it's only because Nintendo is so great at what they do. They're almost victims of their own success in that regard.

It's sort of ridiculous that this topic keeps coming up. We're customers. It's not always all about their quarterly revenue and EBITDA.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

So who are all these "real gamers" that have been gobbling up Mario Party 7 lately, eh?

[PaLaDiN]

Ian the graphics argument isn't "haha Microsoft's graphics suck but Nintendo's are ok". The argument is "Wow, Microsoft's graphics look almost exactly the same as last gen. What the hell else do they have to offer me? At least Nintendo has a new controller."

Second, stop with the bullcrap theoretical stuff, go to a game store and look at the DS library. I've got more "real" games for the DS right now than I bought for the GBA in its entire lifespan. If you think the DS game library is "compromised", then you're either blind or deliberately obtuse. It's just that simple.

[Ian Sane]

"If you think the DS game library is 'compromised', then you're either blind or deliberately obtuse. It's just that simple."

I'm just not that interested in what I'm seeing on the shelf.  To me there's too much emphasis on games designed to get people who don't play games interested.  You may think otherwise but in regards to what interests me the lineup has been compromised by Nintendo's plan to attract non-gamers.  Technically you don't just need non-games to attract this audience as a small simplistic game can do the trick too.

[zakkiel]

Quote
If I ever again have to wait over a year between games I want to play, then I (and customers like me) are within reasonable logic to just say "screw you" and find a better alternative... along with the majority of the market has apparently already has.

See, the thing is you and Ian keep espousing your personal preference as though Nintendo had some sort of obligation to meet it. Since Nintendo owes you exactly nothing, this isn't terribly persuasive. You also then threaten Nintendo loss of customers, right after saying it doesn't matter what's best for Nintendo. That's incoherent. If Nintendo's non-gamer policy is the best decision, it doesn't matter if you leave - that's just the price of a strategy beneficial to Nintendo overall. If it isn't the right decision, then you have to actually argue to that effect if you want to convince someone. Repeatedly saying you plan to stop buying Nintendo consoles doesn't impress anyone. If that's what you want to do, do it. Just don't expect us to care.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
To me there's too much emphasis on games designed to get people who don't play games interested.

WHAT GAMES are you talking about!? If you see games made to appeal to non-gamers, what games are they!? Because I think you're looking at the shelf in imaginary Ian land, not reality.

[Ian Sane]

"Since Nintendo owes you exactly nothing, this isn't terribly persuasive."

How does a company whose success is based on loyal customers like myself not owe me anything?  I think within a reasonable limit it is the job of a console maker to make sure their userbase is satisfied.

"You also then threaten Nintendo loss of customers, right after saying it doesn't matter what's best for Nintendo."

Anytime I discuss Nintendo's success I'm always talking about market share because that's what benefits us gamers.  Higher market share means better third party support.  Nintendo's profit however doesn't affect us at all so "Nintendo's profitable" is a dumb arguement because I really don't care.  Well I don't want them to go broke but cutting corners and denying us options just to stay in the black every quarter doesn't benefit any of us at all.  It just screws us over.  I don't want Nintendo to go broke but I do want them to increase their market share and address my reasonable needs.

When Nintendo said they wouldn't go online because it wasn't profitable I didn't care because I'm not a shareholder.  I'm just a Nintendo gamer forced to be offline.  Now if going online would have bankrupt them then I would have given them some slack.  But they just didn't want to have a temporary loss and I don't care about that.  I think keeping your customers satisfied at a temporary loss is more important than routinely pissing your customers off so that you never ever waste a dime.  One day Nintendo's little profit bubble is going to pop when their antics have scared too many people off for them to make a profit and then they'll be screwed.  Naturally I would rather not see that.

[trip1eX]

IF I wanted 3rd party titles and wanted to go online and didn't like Nintendo's direction and what they do then I would buy another console and call it good.  Yeah I know it's a crazy idea.  

 

[Ian Sane]

"WHAT GAMES are you talking about!? If you see games made to appeal to non-gamers, what games are they!?"

Stuff like Warioware, Yoshi: Touch 'n' Go, Pac-Pix, and Feel the Magic.  Little short novelty games that are fun for someone who is just thrilled by the concept of playing games.  As someone with more experience in gaming I get bored of games like this in minutes and I would never pay full price for them.  They're perfect for non-gamers because they require no commitment and can be played for five minutes.  They're like those free flash games only they cost money.

[Ian Sane]

"IF I wanted 3rd party titles and wanted to go online and didn't like Nintendo's direction and what they do then I would buy another console and call it good."

Every thought that maybe I want Nintendo's first party titles too?  Those are my favourite games and that is the only reason why I stick with Nintendo.  If that wasn't a priority I would have dumped Nintendo in 1997.