Post by: nemo_83 on February 26, 2006, 10:51:59 PM
The bad: Depends on who you ask. Some say the bad is that there is no HD support. Yet recent Sony rumors say their console won't come near the hype, and the HDDVD/Blue Ray war will actually hurt the game industry overall. It can be easily argued that higher pixel standards are nothing more than drains on the game hardware. If you ask me, the bad includes the lack of an ethernet port at this point. Wifi is nothing new and if America thought wifi was a good idea it would have bought it to begin with but it is hard to sell it to America when they know their neighbors can hack the connection. America is spread out, thus there aren't hotspots on every corner giving the public free connection. Honestly I know more people with HDTVs than wifi, I know more people planning to buy a HDTV than wifi, and everyone I have talked to offline is disappointed by the news that there is no ethernet port on the console.
The ugly: How large of outdoor areas will be possible with a CPU one fifth the 360's. How can they do a MMO without a harddrive? How will we save downloads? How will we save games? Will we be allowed a universal friends list!? Things are merky and Nintendo will not share target videos which should for no reason make them vulnerable to the competition stealing their ideas. All that is hurt is Nintendo's image if they delay the showing of graphics and then the visuals really do turn out to be a let down. If the visuals are not an integral part of the strategy of this console then why havn't we seen them. Even running in 480p without 360's pixel standards it is unclear if Revolution will be able to match the polygon and lighting effects of 360 or will somehow Nintendo's ATI chip miraculously be a drastic improvement over the 360's and yet smaller.
And then there is something we don't know about. Coudl it be a packed in screen with the system? A visor? A projector? Would it come across as a g'mick or a real answer to HD that doesn't require double development? Will it come across like the PSone with its "portability" and screen? Will it be as "portable" as VBoy? Can't this just be pushed as a home console?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 26, 2006, 10:57:36 PM
Post by: Mario on February 26, 2006, 10:58:45 PM
EDIT: Also, everything positive there isn't fact either.
Let's analyse the FACTS
Pros
- New controller
- Looks pretty sweet
- New Super Smash Bros game
- New other Nintendo games
- Donkey Kong Jungle Beat can be played on it
- Super Mario Bros can be played on it
- No HD
- Doesn't play Tekken games
- Will be affordable
Cons
- No HD
Post by: Berto2K on February 26, 2006, 11:01:36 PM
quit yer bitching already.
you know nothing, and have nothing to worry about till we get more info.
Post by: PIAC on February 27, 2006, 12:57:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
aka
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83I love the sound of my own voice
Post by: Infernal Monkey on February 27, 2006, 01:52:49 AM
Quote
The ugly: How large of outdoor areas will be possible with a CPU one fifth the 360's. How can they do a MMO without a harddrive? How will we save downloads? How will we save games? Will we be allowed a universal friends list!?
Why does this thread exist?
Post by: KDR_11k on February 27, 2006, 03:06:12 AM
*grabs Project IGI box* Well, if we can assume that a Pentium II 300 can handle a 10km x 10km (100km²) area and we assume that a modern PPC is about three times as fast per cycle and the Revolution CPU has 3x the clock frequency of the Cube's CPU, we'd have... 405*3*3/300*100km²... More than enough.
World size depends on RAM, not CPU. And it depends on how much space your world takes up. Elite had eight or nine entire galaxies in a few kB.
will somehow Nintendo's ATI chip miraculously be a drastic improvement over the 360's and yet smaller.
I don't see where you get the "smaller" bit from but Hollywood has about a year of tech development over the XC's GPU. At roughly comparable size that could mean a 2x performance increase. Even a cheap GPU can beat a more expensive one from two graphics generations ago.
Post by: hudsonhawk on February 27, 2006, 06:24:10 AM
As an HDTV owner, this is the only thing holding me back from preordering a Revolution right now. Call me shallow if you will - and you probably will, since there's a really wierd anti-HD sentiment here - but 480i games look really bad on most HDTV's, 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").
HD is nice, but 480p games look good enough. They just need to support it full-on and require it for every game, instead of half support it like they did with the Gamecube.
Post by: animecyberrat on February 27, 2006, 07:30:27 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 27, 2006, 07:36:01 AM
- 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.
Post by: MaryJane on February 27, 2006, 07:42:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Pros
- Doesn't play Tekken games
LoL that's funny as hell
Ian, please find me one negative feedback from someone who has played with the controller. Then you can say that it's a possible con.
Here's my proof that it's a pro:
Quote
Asked whether or not Revolution's horsepower was insufficient, one development source said no. "At first, we were discouraged that it would be less powerful than Xbox 360, but once we got everything working with the controller, our concerns faded," he explained. Other studios IGN Revolution has been in contact with have echoed this enthusiasm, always admitting that Nintendo's new console will be less powerful, but stressing that with the emphasis on the innovative controller it simply won't matter.
Sounds good to me, how about you?
Post by: nemo_83 on February 27, 2006, 12:46:10 PM
If I go to other forums, people say I'm too pro Nintendo, and I come here and you guys reassure me, I am not a fanboy. I simply enjoy fun games, and Nintendo's console is the only one with a next gen controller. There is nothing wrong with being truthful and speaking about the things I am both worried about and excited about. Do not forget the topic is not just the bad and the ugly, first there is the good. You are perfectly welcome to offer your opinions. And if your opinion is the system is a sparkling piece of perfection, go right ahead and paint yourself a tool. If you think I am wrong prove it, I would much rather be proven wrong, I would love for there to be magic elves inside the Revolution that somehow allow it to do things hardware four times its size by the same companies is overheating and melting to do. The evidence I see suggests a conservative strategy by Nintendo.
I have yet to be given any reason to believe that Nintendo's next console will perform equal or better than the competition even without the competitions pixel ratios. There is no evidence that can prove Revolution is powerful.
When I said the REV CPU was one fifth the 360's I was counting the RAM with that. If you go by MS' hype the CPU is nine times Nintendo's; I went by the RAM to define the potential of the CPU. Maybe I'm wrong for looking for the medium, but you can't believe any developer will squeeze all the juice out of all three of the 360's cores. Plus when I brought up the large areas issue of MMOs I was not just pointing at the RAM, but really the lack of even a hard drive. For truly large worlds one needs a hard drive. Telling developers they can grit their teeth and hammer out a way to stream worlds from the disc is not going to win you any popularity contests (especially when your disc is not likely to be anything but the smallest format once again).
Here is a quote from a Koei developer, "Matsuhara seemed to express some disappointment in Nintendo's use of flash memory instead of a hard disk, noting that 'a full 3D MMORPG (massively multiplayer Online RPG) may not fit.'"
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on February 27, 2006, 01:05:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
I have yet to be given any reason to believe that Nintendo's next console will perform equal or better than the competition even without the competitions pixel ratios. There is no evidence that can prove Revolution is powerful.
We also have no reason to doubt it will be on par.
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
Here is a quote from a Koei developer, "Matsuhara seemed to express some disappointment in Nintendo's use of flash memory instead of a hard disk, noting that 'a full 3D MMORPG (massively multiplayer Online RPG) may not fit.'"
...This has to do with graphics how? Heck, even if its related the quote is dumb. MMORPGs store the character data on the server, not the client.
Post by: nemo_83 on February 27, 2006, 01:44:11 PM
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on February 27, 2006, 01:47:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
Talk of power does not just mean graphics.
...A flash drive verses Hard Drive debate is about storage. But how does having 512 Flash storage instead of a Hard Drive make it weaker? So Devs will need to be more conservative with memory, so what...
Post by: Ian Sane on February 27, 2006, 02:03:21 PM
No one has played any games yet and that's the big iffy part about the Rev. The second the controller was shown everyone was like "Well that's nice. How do I play ____ on it?" There is a very large issue regarding compatibility with certain genres or types of games. So to call it a pro this early to me is premature. I would typically not categorize odd, unexpected change that no one wanted or asked for as a pro until I at least see it in action. If remote games aren't that exciting and/or the remote is incapable of playing certain popular types of games then the controller would be a huge con. Even with the shell as a safety net, if the remote bombs the Rev is at a serious disadvantage. Without it the Rev is just an underpowered "normal console".
Post by: Requiem on February 27, 2006, 02:11:49 PM
Name any game that wouldn't be able to use the NRC + nunchuck attachment effectively (other than fighting games - the shell well most likely handle those - even SSBM Online) and I'll prove you wrong in my next post.
Plus, if the DEVELOPERS (aka biggest game dorks ever) love the controller, is it hard to believe that you will too?
Post by: Galford on February 27, 2006, 02:41:54 PM
Pros
-New controller(Could lead to gameplay possiblities)
-Cheap, easy, to afford
-Nintendo download service
Cons
-No HD (The Rev will look fugly outputting 480i when the competition is doing 720p and 1080i.)
-Underpowered
-No built-in ethernet (This is simply stupid on Nintendo's part)
-Lack of memory
Everything we know about Rev points to it being underpowered versus it's competition. The Rev needs to be easy to port too so third parties will support it.
Post by: RiskyChris on February 27, 2006, 02:45:36 PM
The only con I'm worried about is the lack of an ethernet port (what the hell were they thinking?), but I remember reading that an adapter would allow you to plug into a USB port. HD doesn't concern me, because after N64, graphics for games I enjoy don't matter (I still play SSB64 frequently).
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 27, 2006, 02:47:11 PM
ANOTHER THREAD, ANOTHER TRAINWRECK.
GEEZ.
Post by: MaryJane on February 27, 2006, 03:10:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Ian, please find me one negative feedback from someone who has played with the controller. Then you can say that it's a possible con."
No one has played any games yet and that's the big iffy part about the Rev. The second the controller was shown everyone was like "Well that's nice. How do I play ____ on it?" There is a very large issue regarding compatibility with certain genres or types of games. So to call it a pro this early to me is premature. I would typically not categorize odd, unexpected change that no one wanted or asked for as a pro until I at least see it in action. If remote games aren't that exciting and/or the remote is incapable of playing certain popular types of games then the controller would be a huge con. Even with the shell as a safety net, if the remote bombs the Rev is at a serious disadvantage. Without it the Rev is just an underpowered "normal console".
Didn't you read my whole post? I quoted developers who HAVE played games with the controller. Oh and I wanted a change, I asked for it, bcuz I thought to myself, if nintendo only tries to improve their graphics, I might have to buy a sony, bcuz of the game support. I was thinking more along the lines possibly VR, but making a t.v version of the DS also crossed my mind.
Although I must say to the people who think that the rev will be as powerful as ps3 and 360 please share whatever it is you smoking, cuz it must be good. I believe many different nintendo people have reiterated that it will not, although they haven't said it straight saying "we're not entering the graphics war" is saying the same thing. It's like saying the swiss army is as strong as that of the U.S. Just cuz they don't fight ANY wars doesn't mean their army isn't weaker than the U.S's right?
Oh and the revolution isn't perfect (to agree with nemo) if it were it would have everything it does now, a hard drive, virtual reality, HD graphics, the ability to connect as many remotes to one console as you want, have sex with you, and launch for $299.
ok, but seriously it isn't perfect, but i just believe it's going to be the best system this generation, obviously not for it's graphical capabilities, but it's innovation.
Post by: Talon on February 27, 2006, 03:23:22 PM
Personally I don't think that Nintendo would release this sort of controller if it didn't believe that it could make absolutely BRILLIANT games with it. So I have confidence in Nintendo that this is where the video game industry is headed. We shall all have to wait until the Revolution is released to determine for ourselves whether or not that this new style of interaction is what you personally want.
Post by: darknight06 on February 27, 2006, 03:41:23 PM
Post by: wandering on February 27, 2006, 08:13:31 PM
Outside of that, we know the controller will probably be great, the system will be cheap, the download service will be awesome, etc, etc, etc.
The graphics might be dissapointing, they might not be. We haven't seen them yet.
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 27, 2006, 09:36:40 PM
Xbox 360 graphics are disappointing, so I don't see how Nintendo can avoid that.
PS3 graphics will probably also be disappointing.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 27, 2006, 10:04:18 PM
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.
Post by: BlkPaladin on February 27, 2006, 10:20:08 PM
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.
Post by: wandering on February 27, 2006, 11:10:07 PM
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.
Post by: RiskyChris on February 28, 2006, 01:44:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
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.
Post by: BigJim on February 28, 2006, 02:32:02 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2006, 03:56:19 AM
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.
Post by: hudsonhawk on February 28, 2006, 05:38:45 AM
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.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 28, 2006, 07:14:16 AM
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.
Post by: hudsonhawk on February 28, 2006, 08:41:18 AM
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.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 28, 2006, 09:48:01 AM
Post by: MaryJane on February 28, 2006, 12:26:36 PM
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.
Post by: nemo_83 on February 28, 2006, 12:28:01 PM
Post by: RiskyChris on February 28, 2006, 01:06:29 PM
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?
Post by: Galford on February 28, 2006, 02:22:02 PM
Post by: mantidor on February 28, 2006, 02:30:03 PM
Post by: BigJim on February 28, 2006, 02:33:18 PM
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.
Post by: Berto2K on February 28, 2006, 11:49:39 PM
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.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 01, 2006, 12:45:59 AM
They have?
Post by: Talon on March 01, 2006, 01:53:15 AM
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
Post by: KDR_11k on March 01, 2006, 03:47:43 AM
Post by: megamanx1978 on March 01, 2006, 10:03:56 PM
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.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 02, 2006, 03:44:50 AM
Because he hates everyone else even more and because he wants Nintendo to bbecome better.
Post by: MaryJane on March 02, 2006, 06:33:45 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 02, 2006, 06:47:00 AM
If I hated Nintendo I wouldn't bother posting here nor would I even CARE if they did anything wrong.
Post by: Renny on March 02, 2006, 07:23:44 AM
Post by: megamanx1978 on March 02, 2006, 08:17:16 AM
Post by: trip1eX on March 02, 2006, 09:07:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Renny
If I hated my girlfriend, I wouldn't stick around to beat her.
hehe. That's a good one.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 02, 2006, 09:25:15 AM
I used to like how they rarely milked their franchises and that almost every sequel was essential. Sadly they've slipped in this area big time.
What do I think they're doing right? I'm not the biggest DS fan but the physical hardware itself is solid. It doesn't feel cheap and it doesn't break easily and I feel confident that my DS is going to work for a very long time. Although I feel their quality has slipped a bit Nintendo rarely releases really bad games. Sometimes they release average or unexceptional games. But they rarely release outright junk. Some companies release bad games where it feels like they're intentionally trying to con you into buying crap. Nintendo doesn't do that. Whenever I play a weak Nintendo game it usually feels more like they tried to make a great game but it just didn't work out. Pokemon is the major exception to this though as some of those games feel like intentional rip-offs.
Post by: trip1eX on March 02, 2006, 09:30:11 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 02, 2006, 10:14:01 AM
- free online
- classic downloads feature
- fantastic Cube backwards compatibility including four controller ports
- standard wireless controllers
- case design doesn't look like a toy
- option DVD player support
- the fact that there is a controller shell for games where the remote isn't the ideal way to play
But there are some things that due to a lack of details I'm iffy about. If I have to have a wireless internet connection for a home console the free online isn't quite as nice. The download system sucks if it costs too much. The controller shell is only good if it's actually supported. Stuff like that affects things. Often the crucial detail is still missing.
Post by: Jensen on March 02, 2006, 11:34:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
If I have to have a wireless internet connection for a home console the free online isn't quite as nice.
huh? All it takes is a wired internet connection and a cheap USB wi-fi adaptor
Pros of wi-fi only (revolution) to wired only (xbox 360):
1. Revolution LAN games (8-16 player Mario Kart) with no additional accessories.... if the televisions are in seperate rooms, you won't need a long cable to connect between them.
2. Instant DS to Revolution connection, again, with no additional accessories....
3. You can put your Revolution in a different room from your computer with out using a long Cable (how many people have extra Cat 5 cables laying around?).
Sure. both wired and wi-fi would be better, but if I had to pick one to be in a Nintendo console, it would definately be wi-fi.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 02, 2006, 11:43:24 AM
I'll agree with this but it's still f*cking stupid to force wireless when it is not very common at all.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 02, 2006, 11:53:23 AM
Post by: Jensen on March 02, 2006, 11:55:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
stupid to force wireless when it is not very common at all.
Is it more common for people to have wireless than to have an extra Cat5 cable that they are willing to run from their computer area to their TV? And my first two points are advantages without needing internet at all.
(I personally use my computer monitor as my screen, because it has component inputs, but that is quite uncommon)
Post by: IceCold on March 02, 2006, 11:56:55 AM
Don't forget the single disc LAN multiplayer.. wow, I'm really looking forward to that..
Post by: RiskyChris on March 02, 2006, 12:15:25 PM
Post by: MaryJane on March 02, 2006, 12:20:29 PM
Post by: IceCold on March 02, 2006, 12:32:57 PM
I don't think Merrick was supposed to let the single disc thing slip; it would have made for a wonderful surprise later on..
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 02, 2006, 03:10:09 PM
Post by: megamanx1978 on March 02, 2006, 04:12:19 PM
Post by: Mario on March 02, 2006, 04:17:04 PM
Post by: Freyr on March 02, 2006, 04:34:27 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 03, 2006, 12:15:29 AM
Unlikely. WiFi and Bluetooth are very different.
Post by: MaryJane on March 03, 2006, 05:55:48 AM
also i think i might have to say that no news is also good news for the rev. look at ps3. a lot of news about it has been bad. not all bad obviously, but the only "bad" thing reported about the rev is no HD, and that is depending on who u talk to.
Post by: Berto2K on March 03, 2006, 11:51:44 PM
Post by: RiskyChris on March 04, 2006, 05:53:01 AM
