Author Topic: IGN Promises Rev Specs: Evening 3/29/06 (Read 94997 times)

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #275 on:** April 04, 2006, 11:31:29 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon How can either of us prove our opinions (for that is what they are) to each other? Simple: We wait till games come out, and real world, not imaginary, consumers react to them.

Well said.

Now if only people would follow this advice, this forum would be much, MUCH better off.

trip1eX · « **Reply #276 on:** April 04, 2006, 11:46:22 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel
Look at Oblivion, and then say that again.

I played Oblivion for about half an hour last night, and I'm not overly impressed. The technology is impressive, but the implementation of the graphical style leaves a lot to be desired.

Your hand carrying the weapon is misshapen, the emperor looks like a burn victim, The armor doesn't match the lighting on your face, and the animations are mediocre.

I guess it just goes to show, no matter how much tech you throw at a game, you need good artists to make it look fantastic.

Yeah I felt about the same way. It's not a polished game by any means.

WesDawg · « **Reply #277 on:** April 04, 2006, 11:53:06 AM »

Quote
1. Xbox was SOOO much more advanced than the GameCube. Yet in the real world there graphics were comparable.

No. The XBox had slightly larger specs, the difference between the PPC and IA32 architectures made up for that easily. However, the "Rev"'s CPU is 1/4th as powerful as one X360 core (the Xenon CPU has a simple architecture but it's still on par or above the ancient chips used in the GC), the X360 as three of them. While more cores don't give a linear increase they certainly add SOMETHING.

2. Last(technically still This-)-Gen ps2 was the weakest graphically... did it matter? No. what mattered is what always matters, the games! ps2 had them, now with Rev, the exclusives are going to off the charts compared to prev-gens (previous, just making up a new word :p ) and that's where it's going to count imo, who delivers the best experience.

Actually I think the Dreamcast was the weakest platform. But these specs put the Rev at N64 level in the comparison.

Still, the specs and that Ati contradiction (modified Flipper vs. completely new GPU) really sound like these are the specs of a preliminary devkit. The XC's alpha devkit was 1/3rd as powerful as the final product (according to MS's claims), if that ratio holds true here the Rev would be quite an adequate system (while still having specs that can't cost THAT much).

I've been wondering that too. I don't mind the Rev having less power than the other two, but this seems a little too low. This processor is around the power range of a PowerPC G4 which have about 1/3 to 1/5 of the power of DualCore Intel or PowerPC chips. A comparable Pentium 3 runs about $50 for the normal consumer nowadays (I don't have any idea where you can buy PowerPC chips that aren't add-on boards). A dual-core pentium chip, on the other hand, runs about $200 for the cheapo ones, whereas a non-dual P4 can be had for $100-$150.

All that to say, it just seems TOO low. Forget dual-core junk. They could tack $50 onto the price and put a nice little 3GHz P4 in there and the whole world would be plenty o' happy.

MaryJane · « **Reply #278 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:03:03 PM »

Maybe... just maybe graphics aren't that important.
Maybe... just maybe when you're playing a game that requires physical exertion and mental fortitude you'll be so busy enjoying yourself you'll forget that ps3 has better graphics, and makes a better bookshelf.
Maybe... just maybe I'm going to use my name

till I forget how pointless these freakin threads are!

So the rev is weaker... what the hell are we gonna do about it? NOTHING. We're going to take it like good little boys and girls taking their medicine. Maybe you won't like, but it's good for you. kwitcherbitchin.

zakkiel · « **Reply #279 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:23:46 PM »

Quote
We're going to take it like good little boys and girls taking their medicine. Maybe you won't like, but it's good for you. kwitcherbitchin.

Ladies and Gentleman, we have our new Nintendo marketing slogan! Watch it take the world by storm as people release they should think of video games as medication to be painfully choked down!

Ian Sane · « **Reply #280 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:33:19 PM »

"So the rev is weaker... what the hell are we gonna do about it? NOTHING."

We could, I don't know, not buy the Rev. This is entertainment and if a console maker isn't delivering at a level someone expects them to they don't have to take it. So "deal with it" is NEVER a valid point regarding something like this. People didn't deal with Nintendo sticking with cartridges, they just didn't buy an N64. Maybe in reality it shouldn't matter but if consumers think it matters then it matters, PERIOD.

So it's not just a matter of "if you don't like it, tough". If major games are released on the PS3 and the X360 but NOT the Rev because of the hardware difference then it matters. If multiplatform games always look the worst on the Rev it matters. It matters because it can potentially negatively affect public opinion which affects sales which affects market share which affects third party support which affects game selection. So "just deal with it" isn't acceptable. Nintendo's been telling people to deal with shortcomings for a while now and that's why they're in last and that's why there's nothing to play on the Gamecube right now.

thejeek · « **Reply #281 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:41:42 PM »

Quote
We could, I don't know, not buy the Rev.

Absolutely. I dunno what else I'm gonna buy instead though if it turns out to be a disappointment - nothing on the 360 or PS3 interests me but I also don't want to pay twice to buy what is apparently just another Gamecube - if that's all it is then I want to be able to buy a Rev controller and games for my existing GC. Otherwise, If I've got to shell out for a new console then it had better be a noticable improvement than what I've already got...

MaryJane · « **Reply #282 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:51:07 PM »

LoL, ur posts always make me laugh, you have this strange way of looking at things the wrong way.

Something tells me, I don't know what it is, but something tells me that every person who posts in the forum is going to buy a revolution. if you didn't care about why make millions of millions of long winded posts about it??

What I'm saying is Nintendo is in charge of the revolution, whatever they decide to put, or not put in it, there's nothing we can do about it.

I hear Sony has this new thing out where if you tell them there's something about their system you don't like... like the fact that it's fugly, expensive, the controllers look homosexual, and weighs a ton, they'll build you a custom one to suit your specific needs.

Sorry I forgot April fools passed already.

THIS IS THE BUSINESS/REAL WORLD!! GROW UP!

as much as we'd like to, we don't make decisions, we merely influence them. that's my point. the rev is final for Nintendo it's what they're going with, nothing you can do will stop it. you don't like it don't buy it. I doubt they'll shed a tear or give you one thought.

I can garuntee the success of the Revolution... how you ask? simple, if you average the sales between the gamecube and DS you have a succesful system. Couple that with the buzz it's created around the development community, and you have a success. If only the people who bought a gamecube buy a rev, you still have a success. what more do you want Nintendo knows video games.

Not screaming at you in particular just saying, seriously, if you don't like the rev whats the point of trying to convince fanboys like myself who will buy anything Nintendo (well almost, I didn't buy a Virtual Boy, for that matter I didn't buy an NES or SNES they were given to me on the same day, cuz I grew up poor, but that's life) that it's not a good system?

Hmmm, just thought of something... NEW TOPIC. woop woop.

Kairon · « **Reply #283 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:53:39 PM »

Actually Ian, "just deal with it" is VERY sensible.

"What Nintendo, you don't make games that appeal to me anymore as a consumer? Well then, I'm not buying your console. Just deal with it."

What could be more sensible than that?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Ian Sane · « **Reply #284 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:58:46 PM »

"What I'm saying is Nintendo is in charge of the revolution, whatever they decide to put, or not put in it, there's nothing we can do about it."

So in other words since we can't do anything about anything Nintendo does we shouldn't give our opinion on it. Well then let's just get rid of the forum because there's no point discussing anything about Nintendo whatsoever because our opinion, positive or negative, won't affect anything.

This is a forum. A topic comes up and we discuss it and share our opinions.

There are a lot of people here who seem to just want a Nintendo fan club where we all take turns talking about how great Nintendo is and any negative opinions are to be kept to oneself.

jasonditz · « **Reply #285 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:02:35 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Maybe in reality it shouldn't matter but if consumers think it matters then it matters, PERIOD.

Very true. On the other hand, do the consumers who think it matters... matter?

The late teens who froth at the mouth for uber specs probably wouldn't have bought the Rev even if it had identical specs to the PS3 because of Nintendo's reputation for being teh k1dd13. Your core audience (the people who owned the Cube) probably aren't going to care too much, so long as you give them the games they want.

And the audience your hoping to grow into... the non-gamers. They probably care a lot more about price and approachability than they care about whether the jerseys on the Madden players look shinier on the Xbox 360 or if each individual droplet of sweat is perfectly rendered with realistic physics on the PS3.

If you want the non-gamers on board, you need to price the system as nearly an impulse buy. The DS is the sort of thing most people could just see, decide they want, and grab off the shelf. The PS3 is going to be the sort of thing most people would have to save up for.

MaryJane · « **Reply #286 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:06:35 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"What I'm saying is Nintendo is in charge of the revolution, whatever they decide to put, or not put in it, there's nothing we can do about it."

So in other words since we can't do anything about anything Nintendo does we shouldn't give our opinion on it. Well then let's just get rid of the forum because there's no point discussing anything about Nintendo whatsoever because our opinion, positive or negative, won't affect anything.

This is a forum. A topic comes up and we discuss it and share our opinions.

There are a lot of people here who seem to just want a Nintendo fan club where we all take turns talking about how great Nintendo is and any negative opinions are to be kept to oneself.

There's a difference between discussing it, and repeating over and over the same thoughts with different words.
I'm a little disappointed the rev is weaker than the competition. However, I knew it was going to happen already. So now that it's "official" why repeat what was said when Iwata said the first time that it was going to be weaker? That's my point, there's nothing we can do, we've discussed it at length, why all the bickering??

WesDawg · « **Reply #287 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:58:09 PM »

The reported specs, which aren't in any way official from what I've heard, are more than a little below what the competition is offering. They're way way WAY below it. Iwata said that they weren't going to be the most powerful, but he also said that their console wouldn't look that much different when viewed on SD TV's. This IGN report goes directly against that.

And it has very little to do with graphics, and a lot more to do with what a system can do. Will the Rev be able to handle hundreds of enemies on screen at once? Will the Rev be able to improve AI over what we've seen previously? Will ports to the Rev have unusually long load times over their counterparts? Or is every Rev port not only going to have drastically reduced graphics, but hundreds of enemies removed, portions of levels cut out, and AI who makes it hard not to win?

I'm all for the controller, but I don't want gimped games on the system. Face it. Ports are important. Often times they're fun, and they save me a ton of money because I only have to buy one system.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #288 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:59:20 PM »

Quote
If multiplatform games always look the worst on the Rev it matters

Sounds like the PS2 to me, and we all know how much that hurt its success!

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #289 on:** April 04, 2006, 03:06:53 PM »

I really doubt developers are going to have make all those sacrifices, and besides not many games utilize some of those things, such as hundreds of enemies on screen. Things will be fine, and when it is all said and done I truly believe Revolution will be a big success, it will do more for the next-generation than both PS3 and X360. Even the graphics I do not believe will be that different from its competition on a standard TV, maybe around that of PS2 compared to Xbox 360.

So far I have not been impressed at all with my Xbox 360 (yes I own one), sure it has some good games like Kameo, but most are not unique console experiences. I know people brag up Oblivion, but guess what? I have it for PC, same with GRAW when it comes out in a couple of months for PC. My guess is that PS3 will have unique experiences, but also be inundated with PC and console ports too. With the Revolution, there is potential to truly craft a new experience with every game if the developer chooses.

IceCold · « **Reply #290 on:** April 04, 2006, 03:32:32 PM »

Quote
Even the graphics I do not believe will be that different from its competition on a standard TV, maybe around that of PS2 compared to Xbox 360.

I think you mean the original Xbox, right?

MaryJane · « **Reply #291 on:** April 04, 2006, 03:43:42 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: WesDawg
The reported specs, which aren't in any way official from what I've heard, are more than a little below what the competition is offering. They're way way WAY below it. Iwata said that they weren't going to be the most powerful, but he also said that their console wouldn't look that much different when viewed on SD TV's. This IGN report goes directly against that.

And it has very little to do with graphics, and a lot more to do with what a system can do. Will the Rev be able to handle hundreds of enemies on screen at once? Will the Rev be able to improve AI over what we've seen previously? Will ports to the Rev have unusually long load times over their counterparts? Or is every Rev port not only going to have drastically reduced graphics, but hundreds of enemies removed, portions of levels cut out, and AI who makes it hard not to win?

I'm all for the controller, but I don't want gimped games on the system. Face it. Ports are important. Often times they're fun, and they save me a ton of money because I only have to buy one system.

The specs IGN released show that the rev doesn't look just as good on an SD tv as ps3 and 360?? screenshots please, and don't forget to use the 360's version of King Kong.
And the specs aren't official, not to mention I don't think anyone with a finalized dev kit would take the risk of leakin info, they're much too large of companies. Let's say that the specs released are only 75% of what the Revolution can actually do that means CPU 972MHz and GPU 324MHz. but who cares? read the article carefully, look at the specs of the of xbox compared to GC and then the actual graphical comparison. (No need to tell me that the number IGN weren't based on dev kits but insider info on the cpu and gpu themselves. and therefore make my percentages irrelevant)

Quote
IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube's Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox's CPU, admittedly a different architecture altogether, was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile

Quote
Revolution's ATI-provided "Hollywood" GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube's GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz.

would Nintendo really make a system that couldn't compare to a system the gamecube compared with? or is Microsoft such a computer based company they know how to trump up big numbers to make themselves look better? The rev is underpowered yes. will it be significant? get back to me at e3.

Jensen · « **Reply #292 on:** April 04, 2006, 04:23:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k

No shaders means no shaders.

I believe it said no new shader architecture. The GC used a lot of shaders way before I say them on PC games.. mostly blurred backgrounds and refractive stuff. But, personally, I care more about how stuff is modeled than how realistic the fake bumps on its surface are.

Quote

For example, people are gravitating towards a $200 price point for the Revolution launch. But what if additional hardware like you wish for bumped up the cost to $250?

Then the machine costs 250$. If they can't get reasonable specs at 200$ like they did before they're doing something wrong. Because they managed to build a next gen console for 200$ all the past generations, why can't they repeat that? Because they chose style (small console, slot loading drive, ...) over substance?

Not to mention a few other minor things.... A sensor bar/wand (sounds pretty next-gen to me), built in WiFi ($100 accessory for the 360), 512mb built in memory and an SD slot (which also means they can't subsidise the cost of the console with a mandatory overpriced proprietary memory card), the controller will also be somewhat more expensive. Maybe the "other secret" costs money too?

Anyway, each successive jump from NES -> SNES -> N64 -> GC was much larger in opening up possibilities than a GC -> 360 jump is. So Nintendo felt that it was important to make a jump in something other than raw power.

Nephilim · « **Reply #293 on:** April 04, 2006, 08:49:05 PM »

Jensen tnt2 has shaders, and that was 99
Huge mainstream games like unreal tourament had them too

jasonditz · « **Reply #294 on:** April 04, 2006, 09:06:59 PM »

I just had an epiphany about graphics:

I don't care.

Seriously, the reason I bought my Gamecube wasn't for the improved visuals in games like Rogue Leader, it was because they stopped supporting the Dreamcast. Likewise, I bought the Dreamcast because they stopped making games for my Saturn. And the only reason I even bought the saturn was because it was getting really hard to find Sega CD games.

Its not that the new graphics aren't impressive, it's that I flat out don't care. So long as poor graphics don't get in the way of gameplay, I could frankly give two shits whether they're dramatically improved. If Sega was still making Genesis and Sega CD games, I'd probably never have thought about replacing it.

I've never bought a system because of the graphics... it's always because the previous system stopped being supported, or in the case of my transition from NES to Sega Genesis, because the first system kept breaking and I wanted a more reliable one.

wandering · « **Reply #295 on:** April 05, 2006, 01:19:02 AM »

I feel the same way. Especially because, at this point, good graphics have more to do with art more than horespower. Though I will be dissapointed if, upon seeing the graphics, I don't say 'wow' or think they look comparable to the competition at normal resolutions, as promised.

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Cause the GC didn't get anywhere close to it and I know what to expect from such a small increase in processing power and RAM because I know what difference it makes on my PC.

Wouldn't the difference be different, though, in a normal-res console versus a high-res PC?

Quote
Originally posted by: IanSane
the Cube was one of the most botched consoles I've ever seen.

I think you're confusing the cube with the saturn.

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
This is a forum. A topic comes up and we discuss it and share our opinions.

There are a lot of people here who seem to just want a Nintendo fan club where we all take turns talking about how great Nintendo is and any negative opinions are to be kept to oneself.

When will people learn that this forum would be much better if everyone agreed with me 100% of the time?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #296 on:** April 05, 2006, 04:41:03 AM »

Wouldn't the difference be different, though, in a normal-res console versus a high-res PC?

Depends on your definition of highres, I play Quake 4 at 800x600 for no particular reason. Never mind that the higher the load on a system the more you notice increases in performance.

MaryJane · « **Reply #297 on:** April 05, 2006, 05:47:38 AM »

Progress is a beautiful thing.
I have to say however, that as long as Nintendo didn't release something weaker than the cube, that got no developer lovin, I wouldv'e bought whatever they released. Just because I know when it comes down to games, although they may be few and far between, the games themselves are always top-notch. Graphics are a distant third in importance to me.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #298 on:** April 05, 2006, 07:23:08 AM »

It is funny, some of my favorite games of all time were not considered graphically impressive, they just accomplished what needed to be done. These games include games like Super Mario Sunshine, SM64, Zelda: Wind Waker, Kingdom Hearts I and II, and of course the many games I enjoy for SNES and NES.

Rhoq · « **Reply #299 on:** April 05, 2006, 07:47:40 AM »

The Revolution will not be as powerful as the X360 or PS3. We've known that for quite some time now. I'm still confident that the system will be plenty powerful and output some very nice visuals. However, I've decided that for the next generation, I will no longer commit myself to just one console, as I had done with the GameCube - up until 2 weeks ago.

I was playing Lego Star Wars on my 'Cube a few weeks back and I became annoyed that since LucasArts had decided to stop supporting the GameCube following the disappointing sales of Star Wars: Rebel Strike - Rogue Squadron 3, there were some great Star Wars games that I missed-out on. I decided that it was time for me to break my one console "rule" and pick-up a second system. I went with an XBox.

I'm still not impressed with the XBox 360, and quite hoestly, I refuse to spend that kind of money on a console. Anyways, I got a great deal from a seller on Craig's List (an XBox, 2 controllers, 8MB memory card, 3 games and DVD playback kit for $100).

I am enjoying the Xbox immensely and I am still showing my GameCube the love and attention it deserves. XBox Live is awesome and I can't wait to see what Nintendo will do with the Revolution's on-line service. The graphics on the XBox are very good, as are the 'Cube's. I have no problem with the Revolution looking marginally better than my XBox or GameCube (though I'm sure the difference will be more than just marginal).

At the same time, since Nintendo is going after a different audience and is hoping that the Revolution might start a whole new gaming market, there is really no way it will be able to compete (hardware-wise) with the XBox 360 or the PS3 since they will be complete different from one another. Just like how the Nintendo DS and Sony PSP are so different that there is really no fair comparison between the two, the situation with the Revolution and it's "competition" will be pretty much the same. Everyone will be trying to compare the Revolution to the PS3 and XBox 360 but the playing field will never be level.

Anyways - because of this, I have decided that I will own 2 consoles this upcoming generation. Since I already own an original XBox, the logical choice would be that I pick-up a 360 once the prices become reasonable (ie. $249 or less) so I could take advantage of the backwards compatibility. BUT, I have decided to wait until both the PS3 comes out to make my final decision.

Whichever I decide to get (PS3 or XBox 360), the Revolution will be sitting right next to it.

News:

Author Topic: IGN Promises Rev Specs: Evening 3/29/06 (Read 94997 times)