Topic: The Revolution: the good, the bad, and the ugly

[KDR_11k]

480i games look really bad on most HDTV's

That's because those "great new" technologies like LCD have a native resolution and anything that isn't in this native resolution looks like total crap. It's the reason I still use a CRT because I don't want to be forced to set everything to the same resolution (and there's only stupid aspect ratios available at a decent size).

and games that don't support widescreen are even more annoying (you're either forced to stretch the game, which really uglies it up, or play it with bars on the side which makes my 42" tv effectively a 27").

That's the problem you should have been aware of when you opted to buy a widescreen TV. They suck for everything because there's no native 16:9 data, movies are wider (seriously, I have yet to encounter a movie that doesn't have a bit of black bar left when displayed on our 16:9 screen but maybe you're getting cropped versions that fit into 16:9) and TV is narrower.

I wouldn't consider that a pro. It's too iffy. It could end up being a huge con. I'd say if anything would totally kill the Rev it would be the controller. Changing a tried and true controller design that no one really felt was broken in the first place is a huge risk. I would wait until there are some actual games being shown before I would declare that as a pro. It is a fact that we're getting a new controller but it's not a pro until we have more proof (or ANY proof for that matter) that it's actually a good change.

It's a pro for Nintendo because there's no demand for another generic Nintendo console. Seriously, who would buy a Nintendo console if it was just like the competition but with weaker technology and almost no third-party support (because what third party would support such a console?)? The N64 sold worse than the SNES, the Gamecube sold worse than the N64. Nintendo needed to change something big in order to have a chance at reversing the trend.

[BlkPaladin]

This is slightly off topic but I finished listening to IGN's "weekly" podcast and it brought to light a few interesting things.

One about the new controller: It seems that another third party company (hardware) is making a PS2 controller that emmulates some of functionality of the Revoltion's controller. And they are making a golf game for it.

Two: The development kits for the PS3 were delayed because of some new HD encryption standards that are a bit late. So this may have some effect on their games.

[wandering]

Quote
It's a pro for Nintendo because there's no demand for another generic Nintendo console. Seriously, who would buy a Nintendo console if it was just like the competition but with weaker technology and almost no third-party support (because what third party would support such a console?)? The N64 sold worse than the SNES, the Gamecube sold worse than the N64. Nintendo needed to change something big in order to have a chance at reversing the trend.

Ian already has this covered. The GameCube didn't fail because it didn't offer anything signifigant over the competition. It failed because of all kinds of stupid mistakes: like having a gigantic and unweildy controller, an ugly and ridiculously large console, and a laclustre launch lineup. Oh, wait, sorry that was the Xbox. Anyway, the point is, if Nintendo did the exact same thing as their other 2 competitors, minus offering dvr functionality and blu-ray support and all that, Nintendo would succeed. Definitley.

[RiskyChris]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering

Quote
It's a pro for Nintendo because there's no demand for another generic Nintendo console. Seriously, who would buy a Nintendo console if it was just like the competition but with weaker technology and almost no third-party support (because what third party would support such a console?)? The N64 sold worse than the SNES, the Gamecube sold worse than the N64. Nintendo needed to change something big in order to have a chance at reversing the trend.

Ian already has this covered. The GameCube didn't fail because it didn't offer anything signifigant over the competition. It failed because of all kinds of stupid mistakes: like having a gigantic and unweildy controller, an ugly and ridiculously large console, and a laclustre launch lineup. Oh, wait, sorry that was the Xbox. Anyway, the point is, if Nintendo did the exact same thing as their other 2 competitors, minus offering dvr functionality and blu-ray support and all that, Nintendo would succeed. Definitley.

Nintendo can't do the same thing as Sony and my post is a train wreck, I doubt they have the financial backing to make such risky manuevers (losing 300+ per system?).  The revolution is a relatively cheap way to penetrate and expand the market.

[BigJim]

With a debt-free 10 billion in the bank, they can do lots of interesting things if they chose to. But watching it grow faster than it's re-invested back into their business seems to be a tempting distraction of its own.

[KDR_11k]

One about the new controller: It seems that another third party company (hardware) is making a PS2 controller that emmulates some of functionality of the Revoltion's controller. And they are making a golf game for it.

GameTrak. I'm surprised that's news to you, those things are gathering dust on store shelves since some time last year. The first game was some fighting game, now they're selling a golf game for it.

[hudsonhawk]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
480i games look really bad on most HDTV's

That's because those "great new" technologies like LCD have a native resolution and anything that isn't in this native resolution looks like total crap. It's the reason I still use a CRT because I don't want to be forced to set everything to the same resolution (and there's only stupid aspect ratios available at a decent size).

and games that don't support widescreen are even more annoying (you're either forced to stretch the game, which really uglies it up, or play it with bars on the side which makes my 42" tv effectively a 27").

That's the problem you should have been aware of when you opted to buy a widescreen TV. They suck for everything because there's no native 16:9 data, movies are wider (seriously, I have yet to encounter a movie that doesn't have a bit of black bar left when displayed on our 16:9 screen but maybe you're getting cropped versions that fit into 16:9) and TV is narrower.

Wait.... what exactly are you saying here?  That Nintendo shouldn't support widescreen and progressive scan because you think LCD's and Plasmas are dumb?  That you think I made a bad decision and should be punished with poor quality?  I'm really confused what your point is here.  Yes, CRT's are more robust with resolutions.  But they have a screen size limitation, are heavy, and aren't as luminescent as a plasma or LCD.

The fact is that my Gamecube is the only content that doesn't scale nicely to my plasma tv.  My Xbox, most of my DVD's, and most of the TV I watch are in widescreen.  Those that aren't get deinterlaced (and in some cases upscaled) by my playback hardware.  

LCD's and Plasma TV's are here to stay.  I'm sorry that you don't like them KDR, but Nintendo shouldn't refuse to require games to support widescreen and progressive scan just because you think the technology isn't robust enough.   Every other content provider and game system is friendly to fixed-resolution widescreen HD displays - why can't Nintendo?

Gaming is better in widescreen.  Most TV and movie content has moved to widescreen.  I fail to see the downside in requiring it for all games.  There's no hardware limitation, even the Gamecube can handle it nicely - but since Nintendo doesn't require widescreen / progressive scan support not every game uses it.  

Again, I'm not saying to do HD - I've conceded that one.  But if you want to at least look reasonably good on HD sets you have to do 480p and widescreen.  It's a make-or-break for me.
 

[Ian Sane]

"I quoted developers who HAVE played games with the controller."

I would consider that a biased source.  Why would a dev who is making a Rev game say anything negative?  They want you to buy the console and buy their game.

I've never asked Nintendo to do the same thing as Sony or MS.  But I don't want them to try to dodge the competition and do something incredibly weird either.  They're the best game makers in the world and I think if they just didn't screw so many routine things up, had good marketing, and thought more than two months ahead when making cost cutting decisions they would do much better.  At the very least I'd like to see a Nintendo console that does 90% of everything right and if it still "fails" I can say "yeah it wasn't their fault".  But I see the Cube's and N64's "failures" as largely self inflicted due to severe incompetence so I don't think it makes sense to abandon all hope of competing yet.  I think the problems are also still present and even dodging the competition won't work if they still don't understand how to market effectively or the importance of third party support.

As for the widescreen issue I can think of one problem: Metroid Prime.  Metroid Prime wouldn't have worked in widescreen because it was viewed from the inside of a helmet with a visor.  How could the game be designed with two drastically different fields of vision?  They would have to like redesign the whole HUD.  Or think of a 2D games like Zelda where there are several static "screens".  How would widescreen work for that?  I think developers should be free to use whatever aspect ratio they feel is appropriate.

[hudsonhawk]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian SaneAs for the widescreen issue I can think of one problem: Metroid Prime.  Metroid Prime wouldn't have worked in widescreen because it was viewed from the inside of a helmet with a visor.  How could the game be designed with two drastically different fields of vision?  They would have to like redesign the whole HUD.  Or think of a 2D games like Zelda where there are several static "screens".  How would widescreen work for that?  I think developers should be free to use whatever aspect ratio they feel is appropriate.

The same way most PC games, Xbox games, and Xbox 360 games handle it - by making your display scalable.  Generally you just increase the peripheral vision of camera.  Static pages like inventory screens can be stretched without being disturbing to the eye, so that's not really relevant.

MP handled it better than a lot of the 1st party cube games - it gave you control over the display stretching (and HUD transparency, which was a nice plus) so you could at least split the difference between full on 16x9 stretching and 4:3.  But to make it widescreen native you'd simply right justify and left justify the right and left halves of the HUD.  Your aspect ratio would simply determine how much space there was between the halves, and you would get slightly more peripheral vision.

It isn't rocket science.  The majority of games handle it gracefully.

[KDR_11k]

The proper reaction would be to cut off part of the picture and move the HUD elements from that area inwards when using widescreen. After all you don't want to give widescreen users an unfair advantage. Or you could show some parts of the inside of the helmet in that added area.

[MaryJane]

Quote
I would consider that a biased source. Why would a dev who is making a Rev game say anything negative? They want you to buy the console and buy their game.

They could just not make a game if they thought it sucked. $2000 isn't too much to lose on a dev kit. but at the same time you make a fair point. guess we'll have to wait until e3.

Quote
I've never asked Nintendo to do the same thing as Sony or MS. But I don't want them to try to dodge the competition and do something incredibly weird either. They're the best game makers in the world and I think if they just didn't screw so many routine things up, had good marketing, and thought more than two months ahead when making cost cutting decisions they would do much better. At the very least I'd like to see a Nintendo console that does 90% of everything right and if it still "fails" I can say "yeah it wasn't their fault". But I see the Cube's and N64's "failures" as largely self inflicted due to severe incompetence so I don't think it makes sense to abandon all hope of competing yet. I think the problems are also still present and even dodging the competition won't work if they still don't understand how to market effectively or the importance of third party support.

While I don't agree with you, this is exactly what I wanted to know, what the hell do you expect from nintendo? This explains it, and it's not totally unreasonable. the only thing i'd have to say is instead of crucifying nintendo for decisions we're yet to see the effect of wait until you know how they will turn out. I know the same could be said to myself and the others who praise nintendo constantly, but that praise is based on what you said yourself, "they're  the best game makers in the world" we know they will continue to be great game makers, and a lot of people myself included, are very excited about the new controller, i can't wait to not only get my hands on it, but see what kind of games, the best game makers in the world, are going to create with this new device in tow. Is it bad that nintendo is going to be the weakest graphically? we won't know until completely un-biased people (gamers) and the people who hate nintendo (the media) get their hands on the controller and tell us, and subsequently the launch of the revolution and our own experiences will also tell us. I just don't think it's fair to label something that's only gotten praise (biased or not) so far, as being a con.  

[nemo_83]

It's my opinion that not supporting HD is less important than forcing wifi upon consumers who own nothing that is wireless, but I have experienced the horrible stretching on HD screens with games not built for them.  I would rather not have HD pixel standards, but I am deathly serious about wanting more raw graphical effects than a smaller system.  Small is not a selling point.  Smoother character models and realistic lighting effects are.

[RiskyChris]

Quote
I would consider that a biased source.  Why would a dev who is making a Rev game say anything negative?  They want you to buy the console and buy their game.

That they are supporting the revolution via developing should be proof enough that the system has entertainment capabilities.

What would make companies come back to Nintendo after two generations other than a great system?

[Galford]

Somebody made an earlier post about the PS3 being delayed about a HDTV standard issue?  I wonder if Sony is having issues with ACSS and HDCP?

[mantidor]

Theres also all this hands on impressions on several gaming news sites, many who have been very anti nintendo in the past, like ign and 1-up, and all, and I mean absolutely all of them have been positive about the controller's capabilities, even Matt changed a lot, his only whining has been about HD, but the controller? not a single complain.

[BigJim]

"What would make companies come back to Nintendo after two generations other than a great system?"

Cheap product development, which doesn't automatically translate into great or in-depth products. Another symptom of the "show me the money" attitude some of us take.  

[Berto2K]

What is with all the damn complaining?? Jeez.  Did Cube had less raw power than Xbox....yes.  Did it occasionally have better graphics than Xbox...yes.  Hell even PS2 out did Xbox and Cube in graphics sometimes and it was the weaker of all of them.

All hardware in every industry including PC has become so powerful that just increasing the GPU speed and ram isn't making as much of a difference.   "I can run _______ at 100 fps."  "Oh ya, well I can run it at 130 fps."  Whoopdiefreakindo...you can't see the difference at all anyways.   They are having to add extra features to the GPU bios to make it les difficult on the developer to get the effects they want.  

Everyone just needs to shutup about the graphical capabilities already.  They have confirmed there is no HD support (and for the VAST majority of console owners out there it doesn't matter).  They have said it will do progressive scan.  Put a muzzle on until we actually see something from the games.  

[KDR_11k]

They have said it will do progressive scan.

They have?

[Talon]

Quote
Revolution Report
Q: Will Revolution support high-definition resolutions?

A: No. As Shigeru Miyamoto has said, "The majority of people won't be playing our system with an HDTV, though with the Revolution, 480p resolution will be standard." Nintendo has gone on record a number of times stating that high definition visuals, while attractive, are not in line with the company's goal of making an small, inexpensive and developer-friendly machine.

RevolutionReport.com

[KDR_11k]

I wonder what that means for the PAL regions...

[megamanx1978]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Pros
- New controller"

I wouldn't consider that a pro.  It's too iffy.  It could end up being a huge con.  I'd say if anything would totally kill the Rev it would be the controller.  Changing a tried and true controller design that no one really felt was broken in the first place is a huge risk.  I would wait until there are some actual games being shown before I would declare that as a pro.  It is a fact that we're getting a new controller but it's not a pro until we have more proof (or ANY proof for that matter) that it's actually a good change.

Ian I have read many of your posts over the years and I notice that almost every one of them bashes Nintendo. If you hate Nintendo this much why do you bother even visiting Nintendo sites? Yes Nintendo has made some mistakes in the past but I as a fan can logicly see why they do some things and I think they do have some good reasons why they do many of these things. Yes Nintendo does take risks but you have to when you innovate things. One of the reasons I like Nintendo is not only their great games but also that they are the only ones that have the guts to take risks to innovate to make games better and keep them fun. Why fix it if it isn't broken? I personaly don't like the same old recycled junk year after year and if you don't ever change parts of the hardware that affect the gameplay like the controller you limit the kinds of games that can be made. I think it will improve many types of games like FPS's that will feel sucky on a normal controller after using Nintendo's new controller. You also seem to forget about the classic controller shell which should be common will allow any game to work fine on it. Nintendo is changing the rules of videogames and that is why it is being called REVOLUTION. Think outside the box dude.  

[KDR_11k]

If you hate Nintendo this much why do you bother even visiting Nintendo sites?

Because he hates everyone else even more and because he wants Nintendo to bbecome better.

[MaryJane]

What good is a story without an atagonist? You must admit that his negativity stimulates thought. Although I would have to say that a lot of the doubts he voices, are doubts that I myself have had at one point or another. When I first saw the controller, I was like WTF. nintendo lost their mind. then once i saw what people were doing with it, I was was like, i should call nintendo and tell them to slap me for doubting. the controller will be good, look at the ds, and you know nintendo likes thing as near perfect as they can get them (although i do think the ds touch screen is a little off sometimes)  2 more months and a couple of days and all doubts can be put to bed. my only questio what will people bitch about next? are we gonna have to keep debating the whole HD thing?

[Ian Sane]

"If you hate Nintendo this much why do you bother even visiting Nintendo sites?"

If I hated Nintendo I wouldn't bother posting here nor would I even CARE if they did anything wrong.

[Renny]

If I hated my girlfriend, I wouldn't stick around to beat her.