Topic: On Even Terms With Xenon and NOT PS3?

[Artimus]

Several sites are starting to say Revolution specs will be about the same as Xenon's. Some even say a little lower. These are major sites too, like IGN (hate them ok, but they're rarely wrong about news). Is this just the biggest mistake ever or what? Nintendo continually shoots themselves in the foot with their smaller media, and now they're going to be the weakest system after releasing a YEAR later? That would be game over on day one, plain and simple.

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.

[ThePerm]

revolution will be more powerful then xenon(i say this because nintendo is simply waiting till microsoft finalises their specs and releases them)...ps3...maybe maybe not..it depends on how cell and powerpc processors stack up together. Xenon is supposed to have three 3 ghz cores...if thats so...then revolution will have 2 3ghz cores and 1 3.5ghz core...get what i mean?

[Bill Aurion]

Come on, you'd think people would learn after Sony promised "Toy Story graphics" with the PS2...THIS TIME THEY'LL GET IT I SWEAR!

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...

[ThePerm]

im sure Nintendo has a few different models lined up based on price and power..but no final versions..one thing i know will be true is that it will havea nice ass motherboard. Gamecube did..it was so neat and organized it was nuts. Also, it had a lack of bottlenecks....If anything it wil be mroe powerful then xenon and will get alot of ports from xenon.

[Ian Sane]

The Rev will not be underpowered.  If it has an hardware limitations it will be because of an odd controller or something like that.  The specs will deliver.  Nintendo's consoles always impress in terms of graphics and performance.  People just wrongly assume they don't because they gave realistic specs for the Cube (which in retrospect was pretty dumb) and because they chose to go with a very undetailed simplistic Mario model for nearly all of the Cube Mario games.  You could say Nintendo made some poor decisions in showing off their hardware but they really delivered with the hardware itself.

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.

[KDR_11k]

Sure IGN claims the Rev will be weaker. Gotta make people buy Xenon, right? Seriously, everything is just speculation but it's a nobrainer to assume the Rev will be more powerful. Even if it uses only two 3.5GHz PPCs or something, the graphics system will be two generations ahead. Realistically the CPU doesn't matter for graphics anymore. Which makes me wonder what the point of the Cell is when the only thing that CPU can do in the PS3 is physics since it's awfully slow for game logic/AI.

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.

[Don'tHate742]

I really don't think specs matter.......

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.

[ruby_onix]

If anyone had been listening to the rumblings coming out of Nintendo before (and after) the GameCube's launch, you would've thought that the Cube would be inferior to the PS2. Instead, it was debatably every bit as powerful as the Xbox, which came out at the same time and was more expensive.

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..  

[pudu]

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.  

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.

[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...

[pudu]

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).

[Ian Sane]

"This could again prove to be an effective stratagy at cutting price while delivering on par gaming capabilities"

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.

[Don'tHate742]

They down-play graphics so people don't just run off and buy an Xbox 2 or PS3 for that sole reason. They know where they have the advantage, and that's in GamePlay. Rarely do companies deliver gameplay continously on par with Nintendo. 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. They want to put the companies on their level, on their playing field. It's a smart move I think, but I geuss it has potential to backfire.

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?!

[Ian Sane]

"They down-play graphics so people don't just run off and buy an Xbox 2 or PS3 for that sole reason."

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.

[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.

[Savior]

The Revolution should be on the Sony Level. Maybe not better, but i doubt it would be graphically downgraded.

People seem to take Iwatas comments incorrectly  

[nemo_83]

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.  

[Don'tHate742]

Damn it Ian, did your read my entire post?

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.

[ThePerm]

If we go back to the ps2 dolphin days......Nintendo had this philosophy called "wait and see"..which works pretty well with one competitor. However Microsoft didn't fit into that philosophy. Nintendo set out in this generation to compete with Sony not Microsoft. Microsoft getting into the market was a short 1 year move. Dolphin was in devlopment for 2+ years before it came out. Heres what I beleive.

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.

[nemo_83]

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?

[Grant10k]

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.

[slingshot]

I don't think that liquid nitrogen stays the same temp indefinitely.... so at some point it is going to become just nitrogen,
and cooling will cease.

[Bill Aurion]

Well I think he was talking about how Sony/MS will come up with their initial specs...

[Avinash_Tyagi]

You know its funny, people keep buying into the Sony hype machine even after they've constantly underdelivered.

Toy story graphics...yeah right.

[Tanookisuit]

People will believe whatever Sony shoves up their butts.  I hear PS3 is going to be like playing REALITY.  Serious.