Author Topic: Reggie Says Revolution will be "under $300" (Read 21007 times)

KDR_11k · « **Reply #50 on:** January 20, 2006, 04:36:22 AM »

Alright, talk down to me here. Because, from my understanding, displacement mapping only requires a low poly base which is then expanded to about 3 bazillion polys, which are then remodeled, then they're put into the oven and shrinky-dinked into a managebable, but highly detailed low polygon count model.

Displacement mapping is basically a texture consisting of vectors that each vertex (corner of a polygon) is displaced by. It's what is used in ZBrush, a popular application for adding organic details to highpoly (cinematic quality) models. The resulting highpoly model can be used to calculate normalmaps (textures consisting of vectors that define the texel's normal vector for lighting calculations), aka Dot3 bumpmaps, which allow the realtime lighting to react properly to details that aren't there (not in the model, only on the texture). Any graphics card that's at least a GeForce 2 or has shader support (the GF2 didn't but supported dot3) will be able to display those. Games using them include Far Cry, Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex: Invisible War, Chronicles of Riddick, Halo 2* and Thief 3. Unless Nintendo explicitely asked for shaders to be removed from the Hollywood chip, normalmaps will be possible on the Rev. The game never sees the displacement or highpoly models that were used to create the normalmaps (unless it's Doom 3 which has the normalmap generator built into the game binary).

*= Halo 2 used handpainted normalmaps, they weren'T generated from a highpoly source.

So thus the old franchises don't sell systems like the killer apps of a console should.

The old franchises would sell consoles like killer apps should if they were used to create killer apps. Remember, killer apps have to be both excellently executed and bring something new to the table. Super Mario Bros. created a genre. Final Fantasy VII introduced levels of cinematography never seen in games before. Mario 64 was the first 3d Jump and Run that was worth its salt. Halo introduced vehicles and coop to console FPS. GTA 3 reinvented the franchise to give it the best parts of an arcade racer and a 3d shooter, giving nearly unprecedented levels of freedom to players. Metroid Prime brings Metroid-style progression to the FPS genre (FPSes tend to be very linear otherwise, just as sidescrollers were before).

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #51 on:** January 20, 2006, 07:44:39 AM »

We have to realize that most companies only have 1 or 2 "killer app franchises", while Nintendo has multiple ones, in addition to the constant creation of new ones like Advance Wars, Animal Crossing, Pikmin along with others. The problem with Nintendo's sales have nothing to do with their personal franchises, but their image, and lack of other choices. It is tough to sell systems when you are the only one making worthwhile games for it, it is a fact that gamers like variety. Anyway on a side note, I really wouldn't call Halo as a game bringing something new to the table

, it is basically a copy of much better PC FPS. I would go over some of the other choices for "new to the table" games, but I don't feel like. Let's just say I feel alot of those games mentioned are what is causing gaming to stagnate, and proof that gamers are easily impressed now days

.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #52 on:** January 20, 2006, 08:44:05 AM »

There is no such thing as a "killer app franchise", killer apps are usually either new IPs or severe changes to an old franchise. Once it's a franchise it loses killer app potential because it has already defined its fanbase and gotten its clones (some of which may be superior, e.g. everything Blizzard makes).

Anyway on a side note, I really wouldn't call Halo as a game bringing something new to the table , it is basically a copy of much better PC FPS.

Vehicles that blend seamlessly into an FPS (and are properly implemented, nopt Counterstrike's stupid steerable blocks) were only present in Tribes, Codename: Eagle and G-NOME AFAIK. Tribes has no coop, C:E had severe bugs and G-NOME was mostly a mech sim. Also Halo included a completely new scenario (i.e. franchise). Killer apps either form a new franchise or redefine an existing one.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #53 on:** January 20, 2006, 10:36:31 AM »

KDR just summed up my thoughts on killer app franchises perfectly. What really makes a game a killer app is the uniqueness of it. Once the game becomes a franchise it is no longer unique so it loses that appeal. The very nature of a killer app is that you HAVE to buy new console to get that experience. You didn't HAVE to buy a Gamecube to experience a full 3D platformer and that's why Super Mario Sunshine wasn't a killer app. When Super Mario 64 came out though you absolutely HAD to buy an N64 to experience it. There was no other option.

Kairon · « **Reply #54 on:** January 20, 2006, 11:04:03 AM »

Yeah, KDR and Ian have it right with regard to killer apps.

People keep saying that Nintendo has been so successful because of their franchises. This is ridiculous. Look at the biggest games in the Mario series, in the Zelda series, indeed, the biggest Nintendo games period and you will see that Nintendo hasn't been so successful merely because they've slapped a brand on a videogame, but because even though Mario 64 had Mario's face on it, you didn't think AT ALL of previous mario games while playing it...well, that is unless you stomped on a goomba. (going further, the disappointing Sunshine, Windwaker and DoubleDash games DID feel like sequels instead of like Nintendo sequels in my opinion...)

This is the same issue I have with people who complain about Nintendo sequels. Mario 64 was a sequel, so was Zelda: OoT, so was Mario Kart 64, so was Zelda: LttP, Mario 3, Kirby Superstar, and so many other marquee Nintendo titles. I'd rather have a "Nintendo Sequel" than a new game from any other company.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

mantidor · « **Reply #55 on:** January 20, 2006, 11:37:25 AM »

So basically every Nintendo game on the Rev will be a killer app. Actually, almost any single game will be killer app (as long as its good of course) now that I think about it.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #56 on:** January 20, 2006, 11:52:36 AM »

"So basically every Nintendo game on the Rev will be a killer app."

I guess potentially it could be. It's not just uniqueness alone though that sells. People have to be interested in the unique experience. So that relates a fair bit to marketing and actually having the unique game be really good. A unique turd isn't going to be a killer app nor is a unique game that one knows about. The potential is there though. I remember when the N64 came out practically every game Nintendo announced was a potential killer app because of the big change to 3D. If it wasn't for the lack of games that system could have killed Sony. For the first few years it was like every N64 game meant something.

The "people know about it" factor doesn't just relate to marketing. An overuse of a franchise could hide the uniqueness as well. A lot of Mario games get released and for the most part they're still fairly unique from each other. But the general public doesn't know that. They just see 8 Mario games a year and assume Nintendo is just rehashing to all hell. Slapping franchises into every game could hide the uniqueness hidden within.

IceCold · « **Reply #57 on:** January 20, 2006, 11:55:11 AM »

The very nature of a killer app is that you HAVE to buy new console to get that experience.

Like mantidor said, that's EXACTLY why the Revolution is the only console that can actually make these killer apps possible. Now all we have to do is wait for the software..

Ian Sane · « **Reply #58 on:** January 20, 2006, 12:13:58 PM »

"Like mantidor said, that's EXACTLY why the Revolution is the only console that can actually make these killer apps possible."

Why? How come someone can't create a good unique game on the PS3? You don't have to completely reinvent a controller to make creative games. GTA3 is the killer app for the PS2 and it doesn't use any special features that were not available on the PS1 aside from the better hardware. It was literally the exact same controller but DMA created a game that required one to buy a PS2 (at first anyway) or miss out.

Artimus · « **Reply #59 on:** January 20, 2006, 12:24:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Like mantidor said, that's EXACTLY why the Revolution is the only console that can actually make these killer apps possible."

Why? How come someone can't create a good unique game on the PS3? You don't have to completely reinvent a controller to make creative games. GTA3 is the killer app for the PS2 and it doesn't use any special features that were not available on the PS1 aside from the better hardware. It was literally the exact same controller but DMA created a game that required one to buy a PS2 (at first anyway) or miss out.

They meant that any must have game for the Rev is a killer app, because it probably won't be available for anything else.

IceCold · « **Reply #60 on:** January 20, 2006, 01:13:13 PM »

Yes.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #61 on:** January 20, 2006, 01:46:01 PM »

I see. I misread it. I read it as the Rev is the only console capable of killer apps. Yeah I'd say killer apps on the Rev couldn't be duplicated, unless they were a killer app that used the regular controller shell which is possible. Though I doubt Nintendo would make such a game.

Ceric · « **Reply #62 on:** January 20, 2006, 03:49:32 PM »

Ok, I'll admit I haven't quite finished reading the whole thread but this is interesting to boot.

(From an inflation calculator using the Consumer Index)

What cost $199.99 in 1985 would cost $354.91 in 2005.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2005 and 1985,
they would cost you $199.99 and $112.69 respectively.

So lets do a little math. In all actuality each Rev , taking in account inflation, that is sold will be worth $154.92 less than if that was instead sold as a NES at it's launch date. So it takes roughly two Revs at a $199.99 price point to equal the same amount of money for Nintendo as a single NES at launch. When you look at it this way. Yes it does seem that the Rev is due for a price hike. I mean you can only be $199 for so long. Games consoles, no matter how much they are, are not impulse buys. Anything that is not the size to easily shop lift will not be an impulse buy. At the very least you have to gauge whether you'll have room for it in the car or whether you want to carry it. Ther are other reasons but that's the best I can think of right this second.

Ok I just finished reading this and since I'm the last post I'm going to just edit it. On the whole Mario sports games. They are solid games with loose neat ideas like powerups and weird styles of play that you couldn't do without the trust that a franchise name brings. Just remember that I believe it was Sega that made a soccer game that was different like Super Strikes is for the Cube a couple years back but no one wanted to take a chance with it so it's gone now.

On another note. Does anyone else see anything wrong on that top selling list? Why is Luigi Mansion and Smash Brothers both on it. Those are pretty much launch titles. Grant it that Smash Brothers is an excellent game that everyone recommends while Luigi mansion might be good, I haven't put serious time in it, but it really doesn't seem ot have the clout of Smash Brothers. Yet there they are on the list in the end of a console lifetime. That's unprecedent almost. Most of the time launch titles do not dominate like that throughout the whole lifetime of the system. Because just be virtue of being on the top like that most people who own a system will have it compared to the newer games. It's just odd and can be a sign of how weak the titles were this time around.

IceCold · « **Reply #63 on:** January 20, 2006, 07:01:32 PM »

Anything that is not the size to easily shop lift will not be an impulse buy.

Diamond ring?

Anyway, about the $200 price point, you have to take into consideration how much technology has improved and how much cheaper it is these days. I agree that with inflation and all it's tough to keep the price constant, but I'm confident that Nintendo will deliver.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #64 on:** January 20, 2006, 09:02:42 PM »

IceCold: He didn't say that anything you could shoplift is an impulse buy, he merely said the opposite.

IceCold · « **Reply #65 on:** January 20, 2006, 11:43:34 PM »

Hence the tongue.. but yeah, his reasoning didn't include items that are the size to easily shoplift; so whether or not they are impulse buys is ambiguous.

Ceric · « **Reply #66 on:** January 21, 2006, 07:28:55 AM »

Ironically enough I know more people who bought a diamond ring on impulse than a game console. Also handhelds seem to also be bought more on impulse than home consoles. (I had a friend pick up a PSP on a whim. Just because and hevwas ho humming just a little earlier in the week about maybe getting a game.)

Knoxxville · « **Reply #67 on:** January 21, 2006, 11:45:35 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Quote
Well I didn't say the legion was small. The franchise games still sell but how relevant are they to anyone outside Nintendo's fans?

Considering Mario sports games sell more than 3/4ths of thier sales a year after release / Players Choice, i'd say they are more relevant to other people than Nintendo fans.

Let's have a look at the top selling GC games last month...

1. Mario Party 7 342,206
2. Super Mario Strikers 310,427
3. Super Mario Sunshine 140,716
4. Mario Superstar Baseball 125,198
5. Pokemon XD: Gale of Darkness 109,258
6. Super Smash Bros. Melee 107,552
7. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! 97,006
8. Animal Crossing 96,304
9. Luigi's Mansion 67,635
10. Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour 62,998

Whoops, those games must have accidently been bought by parents when their son clearly asked for a car radio, right?

Mario games are what kept the GameCube alive, if Mario didn't sell 20 million GameCubes, what did?

Luigi's Mansion is still selling?!?

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #68 on:** January 21, 2006, 12:23:53 PM »

Because it's an awesome game...

odifiend · « **Reply #69 on:** January 21, 2006, 02:23:14 PM »

If last month wasn't a huge holiday month, the numbers might mean something more. Mario games are really easy parent and grandparent buys. Buying a Mario game used to mean you were buying the best game on the system.

And for the record, Super Smash Bros. is not a Mario game any more that it is a Zelda game. It is its own franchise.

darknight06 · « **Reply #70 on:** January 21, 2006, 05:51:08 PM »

I'll tell you partly why SSBM still sells, there's a national tournament scene for it.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #71 on:** January 23, 2006, 06:43:21 AM »

"On another note. Does anyone else see anything wrong on that top selling list? Why is Luigi Mansion and Smash Brothers both on it. Those are pretty much launch titles. Grant it that Smash Brothers is an excellent game that everyone recommends while Luigi mansion might be good, I haven't put serious time in it, but it really doesn't seem ot have the clout of Smash Brothers. Yet there they are on the list in the end of a console lifetime. That's unprecedent almost. Most of the time launch titles do not dominate like that throughout the whole lifetime of the system. Because just be virtue of being on the top like that most people who own a system will have it compared to the newer games. It's just odd and can be a sign of how weak the titles were this time around."

I don't think it's a weakness of titles. Well SSBM probably still is the best game on the console but Luigi's Mansion never was. I think it's more a weakness of marketing and it demonstrates how largely ignored the Cube was. Luigi and SSBM come from a small period of time where there was legitimate widespread interest in the Cube. At launch everyone was talking about PS2 vs. Gamecube vs. Xbox. It was going to be this crazy console war and anyone could win. Less than a year after launch though no one really felt the Cube had a chance so the buzz and hype surrounding it dried up. Thus the launch and near launch titles got more publicity than all the other Cube games. Luigi's Mansion was promoted as the flagship title and SSB was widely considered the best Cube game. So they were the most hyped games during the Cube's most popular period and thus they have a huge marketing edge over the other titles. If someone buys a Cube on the whim but doesn't really know much about the library those two games are going to be some of the first titles they check out because they're ones they've heard of.

Prior to Pokemon I didn't really follow the Gameboy so during that time the games I knew of more than any others were Tetris and Super Mario Land. Being the first major games I paid attention to them when the Gameboy was fresh and exciting. But I never got one and didn't follow it after that so I didn't know many other titles. It's the same thing with the Cube. If you haven't followed the Cube you're not going to know much else beyond the launch titles.

vudu · « **Reply #72 on:** January 23, 2006, 08:58:12 AM »

Quote
What cost $199.99 in 1985 would cost $354.91 in 2005.

So lets do a little math. In all actuality each Rev , taking in account inflation, that is sold will be worth $154.92 less than if that was instead sold as a NES at it's launch date. So it takes roughly two Revs at a $199.99 price point to equal the same amount of money for Nintendo as a single NES at launch. When you look at it this way. Yes it does seem that the Rev is due for a price hike. I mean you can only be $199 for so long.

You're forgetting a very important point: it's a lot cheaper to product the same technology as time passes. Think about your computer, it doens't even matter if it's four years old and incapable of running Media Player and Firefox at the same time. How much did it cost you? How much would it have cost to make a computer with the same specs twenty years ago?

Here's another example: What did an Atari cost back in the day? (Seriously, I can't remember.) These days you can buy an Atari Flashback 2.0 for thirty bucks, and it includes 40 games. I'm pretty sure the original Atari cost more than that, and it didn't include that many games (just combat, I believe).

News:

Author Topic: Reggie Says Revolution will be "under $300" (Read 21007 times)