Post by: Artimus on March 24, 2005, 07:20:08 AM
Now, this is just a rumour. But as far as I'm concerned if Nintendo has even a slight chance they have to at LEAST be tied for most powerful, if not the most powerful. Otherwise the media will crucify them before they even begin.
Post by: ThePerm on March 24, 2005, 07:53:47 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 24, 2005, 08:02:20 AM
And yeah, IGN is merely speculating and acting as if it were fact, like they ALWAYS do...Revolution hardware is most likely not finalized yet...
Post by: ThePerm on March 24, 2005, 08:07:15 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 24, 2005, 08:15:45 AM
I think the Rev could be the best looking console of the three. It will have the Xenon beat just due to it's later release and Sony always chokes on graphics. The PS1 and PS2 looked like CRAP. The Playstation reputation for graphics is based on FMV and sheer ignorance from the public.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 24, 2005, 08:27:34 AM
Nintendo is also the only one out of the three that actually makes games so they know best where to spend more and where less. Nintendo would never have okayed the PS2 design, those VPUs are pointless, they only bloat the numbers but don't contribute much to the games.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 24, 2005, 09:04:04 AM
As long as Nintendo is up there, then it really doesn't matter. Each system will bring fantastic graphics, so there's no real point to worry. Maybe some machines can pump out more polygons, or better water-effects; but all in all, it'll come down to the games.
Just to geuss though, the order of which console is more powerful will basically be the same as it is today. Although, since the Xbox 2 is shipping early, it utimatically goes from 1st to 3rd. Meaning Rev >= PS3 > Xbox 2. I only made the Rev first because of the same exact reason Ian and KDR_11k described......they don't know what's needed in the consoles hardware, and the PS1 and PS2 are clear indications. Now it might still be powerful, and that's why I put that little "=" sign.
Personally, all I want is a cel-shaded adventure not unlike Cowboy Bebop *drools*. If that can be done, then hell, that's all the graphics I need.
Post by: ruby_onix on March 24, 2005, 09:19:51 AM
Of course, everyone was so convinced that it should be inferior to the PS2, because the PS2 was more expensive, it got resigned to being "probably less powerful than the Xbox".
In this next generation, Sony and Microsoft are trading hardware places.
Microsoft is launching a year early, like the PS2 did. It's a safe bet that the Rev will be significantly cheaper than either the Xbox2 or PS3. That's just a "company philosophy" thing, coming in from all three companies. Plus the Rev will have that special "something" that Nintendo's keeping top-secret. It's a little hard to believe that Nintendo will put out something as powerful as the PS3 for less money, but the Rev could theoretically do it by being a better, more focused "game machine". Nintendo proved that was possible with the GameCube. At the very least it's sure to hang with the Xbox2 in terms of technology. They won't deliberately make the "most inferior" console on the market when they've got the Xbox2's specs sitting right in front of them..
Post by: pudu on March 24, 2005, 09:38:36 AM
As far as comparing the Revolution with the PS3 I see the PS3 being clearly more powerful. This is because that is what Sony is shooting for, supreme graphics and technology. I'm perfectly fine with the PS3 being more powerful because it's mearly due to a different opinion on where the money is best spent. The thing to think about though is even though most of us on these forums agree that new ways to play games and improved gameplay are more important than better graphics this is not the view of the general population. Most people judge gaming machines on graphics far more then any other variable.
Let me just say this: No matter how Revolutionary the new aspect of Nintendo's next console is if it has substantially weaker graphics then the competition (especially the already released Xbox 2) then there will be some very upset people, including most of us here on the forums I presume.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 24, 2005, 09:49:28 AM
Read ruby's post right above yours...Ninty also played down graphics LAST gen, and their system is still almost equal to that of the Xbox...
Post by: pudu on March 24, 2005, 10:28:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
I'm pretty freaked out about how Nintendo frequently downplays graphical power. That and all the rumors going around that it will be perhaps the weakest of all the consoles just doesn't sit well with me. I'm hoping they end up with atleast a slight advantage in graphics prowess over that of the Xbox 2.
Read ruby's post right above yours...Ninty also played down graphics LAST gen, and their system is still almost equal to that of the Xbox...
Hmm took a grub break while writing the post and missed ruby's post. This is very true. What I don't understand is why Nintendo always downplays graphics every generation. I guess what they are doing is downplaying graphics as a whole and saying they will undoubtably be more amazing this gen but it comes off as them saying they don't care to try and compete on the graphical front (not sure if I just made up a term...oh well).
What Ruby said, "It's a little hard to believe that Nintendo will put out something as powerful as the PS3 for less money, but the Rev could theoretically do it by being a better, more focused "game machine""
I had forgotten about this. This could again prove to be an effective stratagy at cutting price while delivering on par gaming capabilities (what I care about most).
Post by: Ian Sane on March 24, 2005, 10:50:36 AM
It depends on the price difference. If it's too small it won't matter. People will just assume that the lower price is because of inferior hardware. Having a console the same price with better graphics would probably be better since when they want to Nintendo is capable of making better use of their hardware than others. Plus hardware isn't just graphics. It's AI, framerate, the amount of characters on screen, etc. Those are gameplay issues. Games do suffer from a gameplay perspective due to inferior hardware.
Plus I think the "game machine" strategy is crappy. You don't sell the steak you sell the sizzle. If a system plays movies and has better looking graphics people are going pay more attention to it even if the competitor is more focused at being a "dedicated game machine". Plus there's no rule that you have to sell the sizzle without the streak. Just because it has better graphics and looks cooler and plays movies and such doesn't mean it doesn't have games. The PS3 will have a better game lineup than the Rev. I'm not being trying to be down on the Rev or anything but Sony has the third parties and thus do to the sheer volume of titles they will have more good games than the Rev will. That's just how it is. So the Rev won't even have the games advantage and we're left with a system with inferior graphics and less good games. The Rev will have the steak but the PS3 will have the steak and the sizzle. So why give the PS3 another advantage when it already will have some? The Rev hardware has to be as good as the PS3 or better. It will just be disadvantaged otherwise.
Nintendo should match the PS3 and try to do some things better but sacrificing one thing to benefit something else just won't work.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 24, 2005, 11:34:20 AM
If I were them, I'd concentrate on a killer app. Something new, and fresh to prove that their gameplay mechanic is the way to go. Not only would it prove it to us gamers, but also to third-parties. If Nintendo could recieve all the good third-party support (Namco, Capcom, Konami) that the PS2 has, we, the Nintendo fans, would embrace their games tremendously. We know gameplay and we know games. We don't let a good game slide by, for it would be like letting a fantastic music cd go un-listened. If the third-parties only knew that fact, we'd see alot of great games released. I could almost gurantee that more than 80% of our userbase would go out and purchase the game. What can I say? We're gameplay whores.
Great games ofcourse, would be the only thing that would sell......other third parties such as EA (except for Burnout, Sports games) wouldn't do so hot. That's awesome, maybe then they'll learn a much needed lesson in art and not business. Or maybe not, and will see them leave the console....
Can Nintendo ever win?!
Post by: Ian Sane on March 24, 2005, 12:02:36 PM
Down-playing the competition's features isn't a good strategy though. All it does is inform everyone that the competition has something they don't or gives everyone that perception. Instead they should play up their advantages. That way they're focusing on what they do better. Otherwise they're focusing on what the competition does better and trying to make it sound like it doesn't matter. That's the attitude of a whiny loser. If you're going to try to win a girl and are competing with someone better looking are you going to say "looks aren't that important" or "I'm more successful than that guy"? People want results not excuses.
Plus it's not like Nintendo always makes up for what they down-play. They down-played online play but all they had to counteract it was connectivity. Either match the competition or do something better. Down-playing the competition and then delivering an alternative that's either no better or is outright inferior is going to have more negative effects than anything. Excuses aren't good enough and being different isn't good enough. Only being the same or better is acceptable.
Post by: RickPowers on March 24, 2005, 12:17:03 PM
That doesn't mean we won't see great games, or fantastic graphics on Revolution. I think Nintendo's hit the nail on the head when they say that we've reached a technology level where the hardware is starting to become irrelevant (see my recent editorial), so coming up with ways to make the gaming experience new and different is important. What I'm afraid of is that these "new and different" experiences are going to become gimmicks, substituting for the gameplay instead of augmenting it. If Nintendo can keep that from happening, I think they have an excellent shot of leading this generation.
On that note, I'd also like to mention that I think Microsoft's "HD Era" of gaming could be dangerous to the industry on a whole. Inflated development budgets will hinder innovation as publishers try to minimize risk, leaving little room for anything other than heavyweights. If this ends up being what gamers want to play, Nintendo could have a rough few years on its hands unless the hardware is capable of keeping up.
Post by: Savior on March 24, 2005, 12:31:07 PM
People seem to take Iwatas comments incorrectly
Post by: nemo_83 on March 24, 2005, 01:41:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
I have absolutely no doubt that Revolution will have less raw horsepower than the PS3. Nintendo excells at developing efficient hardware, while Sony (and arguably Microsoft) like to throw as much power in the system as they can afford and let the developers worry about the optimization and working around the bottlenecks.
That doesn't mean we won't see great games, or fantastic graphics on Revolution. I think Nintendo's hit the nail on the head when they say that we've reached a technology level where the hardware is starting to become irrelevant (see my recent editorial), so coming up with ways to make the gaming experience new and different is important. What I'm afraid of is that these "new and different" experiences are going to become gimmicks, substituting for the gameplay instead of augmenting it. If Nintendo can keep that from happening, I think they have an excellent shot of leading this generation.
On that note, I'd also like to mention that I think Microsoft's "HD Era" of gaming could be dangerous to the industry on a whole. Inflated development budgets will hinder innovation as publishers try to minimize risk, leaving little room for anything other than heavyweights. If this ends up being what gamers want to play, Nintendo could have a rough few years on its hands unless the hardware is capable of keeping up.
How much of the development community do you think thinks the "HD Era" or "HD revolution" is going to be a load of crap? To me it sounds like how the Sega Saturn only continued to make 2D games look better. Like how the Saturn addressed the problems of the previous generation but Sega lacked the vision to see a future market of gaming consoles with standard analog sticks and 3D architecture. MS just seems like they want to make everything turned up a little louder, the screen a little bigger, and the pixels a little more clear. I don't see the need to make games like that. I think of games modeled after Zelda WW's graphical efficiency on next gen systems. I think Nintendo's system will be the best at cel shading which offers much more to the imaginations of developers. There is only so much you can do with realism before you have destroyed the illusion of realism by inserting creativity. I believe though that I recently read a quote about MS having ATI and IBM build the NextBox's chips to mimic the Revolutions resulting in games that would be next to easy to port between the machines. Until we actually get to see what Nintendo has planned we are stuck in Speculationville, but Nintendo has been working on Revolution for years with their hardware partners IBM, ATI, and possibly Gyration. MS is the company with the chip set that has most likely recieved the least amount of development time from IBM and ATI.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 24, 2005, 01:51:50 PM
In case you didn't, I said this: They are basically saying "Hey we have graphics just like those other consoles, but we have something they don't have!" That's why they down-play graphics as a whole.
It's a smart move to have what the competitors have, but to also downplay it, if that's the main concept competitors are reaching for. I'm not sure with all this WhiteFang crap that's been going around, but I can almost say that the PS3 is going to be a graphics-junky. If Nintendo can pump out similar type graphics, but also give amazing innovative gameplay, then they have it made. They need to come out of the gate the quickest, so that third-parties tag along. That's a tough thing to do, considering the PS3 has it's glorified name. But like Rick said, if they can provide a non-gimmicky innovation to the video-game industry, that not only allows all games to be played, but allows for new, ground-breaking exclusives......THEY GOT IT MADE.
It's hard to see that happening though, especially with Nintendo's track record. Although, I think it's safe to assume that they will come in 2nd this generation (in the US that is). They are launching online WiFi or whatever that's free, to combat Xbox Live, and hopefully it is more powerful than the Xbox 2. As long as Microsoft doesn't have a new super killer app to carry the system, which seems unlikely, I think it's safe to assume Nintendo will gain back previously lost marketshare.
Post by: ThePerm on March 24, 2005, 02:43:58 PM
IBM is savvy, they are making all the next gen systems' processors. ATI is making both Revs and Xenons gpu, and nVidia is making ps3's graphics card.
As far as graphic processors go Nintendo and Microsofts will be pretty identical. Nintendo's will probably be better though thanks to timing. Sony's gpu will probably be on equal footing with Revs
anyway, Sony's processor will be better most likely. That is depending on how well ps3's version of cell stacks up to the latest power pc processor that Nintendo will have. Nintendo will have a better powerpc processor then xenon.
You see Microsoft is tryign to get the year ahead lead...but its not going to work like it did for Sony. It will have inferior hardware, but its not going to have Market leader status. What is going to happen is PS3 and Rev will launch at the same time making Xenon look inferior. Basically this gen will be how the last gen should have been.
Post by: nemo_83 on March 24, 2005, 04:18:55 PM
I think they are downplaying graphics because they truly believe graphics don't matter. What matters is time and money when it comes to graphics. Iwata says that graphics are becoming photorealistic next gen. I am sure he has some insight on what both MS and Sony are doing graphically. I remember a time when people were saying that the PS2 would stomp the Dolphin's graphics, but that day never came. I just hope that Nintendo plays to the wants of developers with the graphics on Revolution. I feel that the large Japanese companies may feel different now about Sony since Sony has switched leadership to an American recently and Sony has a 61 billion dollar debt. I hope this means they will find Nintendo's system more attractive. I do not believe Nintendo needs to do any better than the NextBox polygon wise though. I would like to see the Revolution be the best at lighting and coloring polygons. I don't really care for a million different textures or stats that require a blue ray disk or even a full HDDVD. I want games with gameplay filling the disk. I want more interactive worlds. I want standard real time physics and lighting. Nintendo is the best in the world at making games. Should they not be the best in the world at making tools for making games too? Should they not be the first company to make game development tools available to the masses?
Post by: Grant10k on March 24, 2005, 07:44:39 PM
Quote
I want more interactive worlds. I want standard real time physics and lighting. Nintendo is the best in the world at making games. Should they not be the best in the world at making tools for making games too? Should they not be the first company to make game development tools available to the masses?
sorta like, Half-Life 2 meets Nintendo?
Anywho, I have a feeling that sony and ms will liquid nitrogen cool their systems while rendering as many shader-less polygons as they can, then double that number... nintendo, on the other hand, will avoid pulling numbers out their asses.
Post by: slingshot on March 25, 2005, 03:42:29 AM
and cooling will cease.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 25, 2005, 03:49:10 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on March 25, 2005, 05:47:07 AM
Toy story graphics...yeah right.
Post by: Tanookisuit on March 25, 2005, 06:27:35 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on March 25, 2005, 06:36:17 AM
And just imagine all the broken systems, it'll make the PS2 seem reliable.
Post by: mjbd on March 25, 2005, 12:38:02 PM
Post by: Talon on March 25, 2005, 08:48:39 PM
One must not forget that although Sony is boasting about its new Cell technology that the ps3 isnt just a video game console but also a Blu-Ray player, toaster...etc.
Nintendo had the right idea with the Gamecube in the sense that its meant purely for video games only. With that in mind the gamecubes hardware was designed and built around this philosphy allowing for a much more efficient console with no so many bottle necks the ps2 and xbox face. So although on paper its technical inferior to the X-box in reality there isnt much of a difference between the two in terms of graphics.
So to all those people worried about hardware specs go buy a computer. Video game consoles are about the games and more importantly gameplay. Id prefer to play a graphically inferrior game with really tight gameplay as apposed to the most beautiful graphical game that has the worst of the worse gameplay.
Graphics is only part of what makes a video game good. Lets not forget about gameplay, playability and most important FUN.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 25, 2005, 09:26:54 PM
Post by: Talon on March 25, 2005, 09:58:01 PM
Quote
devs usually give equal attention to all aspects of the game
In an ideal world they do, but in reality its generally not the case for example:
Super Mario Sunshine review on IGN was
6.0 Presentation
8.0 Graphics
7.0 Sound
9.0 Gameplay
9.0 Lasting Apeal
9.4 Overall
As you can see the games sound lacked a bit and the graphics werent quite on par with its gameplay. One of the comments IGN made about the Graphics was 'Bad art and textures damage it' but it sill managed to score 9.4 overall. You will notice that games that have more foccus put onto their gameplay rather than their graphics still score quite high on sites like this one and ign.
There are four factors that face developers when making video-games and/or software and thats
Now you can easily juggle three of those factors but there is always one that you cant juggle at all.
For example if a developer has hard deadlines then the scope of a project has to be reduced to fit into the time frame, if the scope is reduced then cost is generally not an issue but the project itself looses quality.
Likewise if a developer has soft deadlines to meet than can continually get pushed back the scope of the project doesnt suffer and the quality is usually high but the cost of the project gets blown out of preportion.
Developers are constantly trying to juggle these factors and in reality something has to suffer.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 26, 2005, 07:46:20 AM
Gameplay is the most important thing for sure but a game with great gameplay and graphics is better than a game with just great gameplay. We shouldn't accept anything else particularly from a company that has proven to be capable of delivering on both elements.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 26, 2005, 08:31:29 AM
Post by: Galford on March 26, 2005, 01:48:25 PM
How easy will it be to access the power of Rev, Xenon, and the PS3?
I can tell you from a programmer's stand point, that getting nine processors
that all work independently, to run at maximum power is not an easy task.
Post by: nemo_83 on March 26, 2005, 05:04:44 PM
Post by: Tanookisuit on March 26, 2005, 08:25:31 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 26, 2005, 08:49:07 PM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 27, 2005, 12:11:54 AM
I am assuming the REV will be manufactured with developers in mind, and un-like the GameCube era, I see that really helping Nintentdo. Nobody wants to spend a year on half a year's work, and Nintendo could capatilize on that concept.
As for Sunshine graphics.....did you see the water?! The game was based around that aspect, and the graphics proved it. I admit that the textures were bleak, but who cared during Noki Bay? That level was beautiful.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 27, 2005, 05:47:34 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 27, 2005, 05:47:39 AM
During Iwata's GDC speech, he said that deving for the Rev would "be very familiar"...So I assume it will be near identical to work with as the Gamecube...
Post by: ghostVi on March 27, 2005, 06:40:30 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Galford: Multiply that by four, ONE Cell has one main processor and eight VPUs, the PS3 has four of 'em. Yeah, kinda nasty to code for and hell on earth to debug.
What? Where did you get that number from?
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 27, 2005, 07:56:34 AM
The REV has yet to be even slightly revealed, so it's hard to geuss anything at this point. One thing is for sure, it has to be able to stun.
Post by: Koopa Troopa on March 27, 2005, 10:23:31 AM
Quote
Galford: Multiply that by four, ONE Cell has one main processor and eight VPUs, the PS3 has four of 'em. Yeah, kinda nasty to code for and hell on earth to debug.
And that is an understatement. I don't think you could pay me to program for the PS3; I might be inclined to try it for fun (gotta love a good challenge,) but I really wouldn't want to be under the gun developing for it.
Post by: Galford on March 27, 2005, 03:38:45 PM
I find it hard to believe, but then again Sony did develop the PS2...
Post by: Gamefreak on March 27, 2005, 05:55:12 PM
Early 90's. SNES more powerful than Genesis.
Mid 90's. N64 more powerful than Saturn or PS1.
Fast forward to right before this generation.
Nintendo - Gamecube will use an ArtX graphics chip and IBM CPU. We won't answer any of your questions about specs cause we're cool like that.
Sony - PS2 is teH RoXXoR! It has a state of the art Emotion engine and can do 75 million polygons per second! owned!
Media - Reports indicate that Nintendo's new console will be inferior technologically compared to the PS2.
Fast forward to unveiling of GCN specs and Rogue Leader. It went something like this.
"Kutaragi - Our emotion engine can render unheard of numbers of polys per sec-SMACK
*Nintendo *****slaps Kutaragi*
Face it, there has never been a home console more powerful than a Nintendo one except Xbox, and even with the Xbox's hardware superiority (marginally) the title of best looking console game still goes to RE4 on Gamecube.
Nintendo always makes powerful consoles, they just don't brag about them. I mean Nintendo's probably the only company in the world that will give you REAL polygon-per-second numbers and even then give you lower numbers that what the Gamecube is capable of. Even on day one developers were saying Nintendo's specs of around 14 million polys per second (i think, can't remember, it was years ago) were ridiculously low.
Even the Wavebird's wireless range on the box is 3 times less that what everyone knows it really is.
Nintendo's a modest company. But I can garauntee you the Revolution will be powerful. Perhaps not PS3 level since Sony is going out of their way to not be the weakest console this time, but definitely more powerful than Xenon because 1. it will have one year newer parts from the same CPU and GPU companies and 2. MS is going out of their way to minimize Xenon costs.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 27, 2005, 09:00:22 PM
I think the performance numbers Nintendo gives are meant for developers. When Sony tells you the theoretical maximum you still don't know how much you can do with the system. Nintendo says "we managed to get these numbers in our tests" and the developers can see that these are real world numbers. I think the Cell will also exhibit some bottlenecks like when you have to send data between Cells instead of having everything you need at the Cell where you need it. Sure, it's still pretty fast but knowing game development the glass is always half empty.
Sony claims they can abstract it to the point where you don't even notice you're working with more than one processor but I can gurantee you no dev will accept that. It means you don't know how fat data can be transferred between steps as you have no idea where the instructions are processed and I have a feeling the heavy branching present in games will cause further issues (how will the load balancer react if suddently an apulet has to be replaced but it doesn't know that the old one has to be removed? Will it suddently direct your data stream through other Cells?).
Post by: Don'tHate742 on March 28, 2005, 06:16:39 AM
Post by: ThePerm on March 28, 2005, 12:58:01 PM
Post by: Galford on March 28, 2005, 02:14:20 PM
Also, unless Sony can get the heat down on Cell, a four Cell PS3 should be able to cook breakfast
with no problem...
I kinda wonder how MS is going to sell Xenon's CPU? Is MS going to position it as a three core unit or as a six thread unit?
Post by: Grant10k on March 28, 2005, 09:01:05 PM
Quote
Also, unless Sony can get the heat down on Cell, a four Cell PS3 should be able to cook breakfast
"If that port on the bottom of the PS3 isn't for a broadband adaptor, then what the hell is it for?"
"The PS3 Waffle Iron"
Post by: Galford on March 29, 2005, 03:12:16 PM
With all the things that Sony wants to put Cell into,
nothing would suprise me anymore...
Post by: KDR_11k on March 29, 2005, 09:55:57 PM
Post by: IceCold on April 02, 2005, 10:19:07 PM
QuoteAs Bill said, the draw distance was just spectacular, and also, the water effects were astounding. Who knows how many hours I spent jsut getting to the highest point of the level and looking around, or swimming in the water and looking at the surface glimmer. The textures may not have been up to par, but you really can't call SMS a bad game graphically
Super Mario Sunshine is a bad example because it's rather LAZY graphics and presentation is very un-Nintendo. Compare it to say Pikmin, SSBM, Wind Waker, and Metroid Prime that manage to have gameplay on par with SMS and much better graphics and presentation.
Post by: Spiker on April 06, 2005, 12:07:18 PM
Xbox2
-Pushing for an early release date.
-Will be sold in three different models, Bare Bones model with no harddrive or DVD playback, middle model with DVD playback and harddrive. Both of those will be backwards compatible. The highest model is the XboxPC hybrid that people were talking about, he said that it would be made for digh definition and that you could go online with it, this is not backwards compatible.
PS3
-Apparently the government is involved with funding for the Cell Processor and so that the government and sony are having some disputes and he expects Ps3 to be delayed to summer of 2006 instead of early 2006.
He also said that the reason that we arent see very many DS games is because Nintendo is hard at work with games for the next generation Game Boy. The only thing he said about Revoltion is how it will have a touch pad controller.
I don't really know what to believe, the Xbox2 sounds solid but eveything else sounds sketchy.
Post by: couchmonkey on April 06, 2005, 12:27:06 PM
I'd believe what he told you about the Xbox2, but take the other comments with a grain of salt.
Post by: Mr. Saturn on April 06, 2005, 12:32:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Spiker
Alright, I work at GameStop and every GameStop has a Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft representatives that come to the store update all the signs, demos, and answer any questions. Well the Microsoft rep came over the other day to do his job and let out some information about Xbox2 and PS3.
Xbox2
-Pushing for an early release date.
-Will be sold in three different models, Bare Bones model with no harddrive or DVD playback, middle model with DVD playback and harddrive. Both of those will be backwards compatible. The highest model is the XboxPC hybrid that people were talking about, he said that it would be made for digh definition and that you could go online with it, this is not backwards compatible.
PS3
-Apparently the government is involved with funding for the Cell Processor and so that the government and sony are having some disputes and he expects Ps3 to be delayed to summer of 2006 instead of early 2006.
He also said that the reason that we arent see very many DS games is because Nintendo is hard at work with games for the next generation Game Boy. The only thing he said about Revoltion is how it will have a touch pad controller.
I don't really know what to believe, the Xbox2 sounds solid but eveything else sounds sketchy.
Yeah I really wouldn't trust what this guy says about the Revolution and PS3, considering it was a Microsoft represenative who told you this. I imagine him telling you the Revolution is going to have a touch-pad controller, is based off of that Game Informer article.
Post by: vudu on April 06, 2005, 12:43:43 PM
