Author Topic: No Hi-def resolution, Nintendo's cost benefit analysis (Read 59388 times)

jasonditz · « **Reply #50 on:** June 11, 2005, 09:18:49 AM »

Unless this is Perrin saying ignorant things again, this is moronic.

The Cube supports HD and widescreen, why the hell would the Rev break that support?

BigJim · « **Reply #51 on:** June 11, 2005, 09:22:54 AM »

What are you defining as HD? The Cube's component-out support is only 480p.

jasonditz · « **Reply #52 on:** June 11, 2005, 09:38:24 AM »

what are they defining as HD? I'm not entirely clear on it.

The Omen · « **Reply #53 on:** June 11, 2005, 09:44:48 AM »

Quote
Well Nintendo was on such a roll with the Rev so far I guess it was just a matter of time before their first incredibly stupid decision was revealed. Well actually not having an ethernet jack in the Rev was dumb mistake #1 but at least they're offering a work around for that one.

What can I say? For the THIRD time in a row Nintendo is thinking in the present to plan for the future. First it was optical discs, then online, now HD. At least their traditional dumb oversights are becoming less crucial but it's a dumb move nonetheless. This announcement just cost them Rev sales. It's not going to be N64 bad and it's not instant DOOMED or anything like that but they just lost sales. Why? Why not match the competition? Why give people an excuse not to buy a Rev? This sort of dumb sh!t is why the Cube never really caught on. Nintendo just gave people so many reasons to pick the competition over them. On it's own this isn't that big of a deal but you just know that there's going to be some other stupid problems. That's just how it is. Every console is going to have some problem that wasn't forseen. But the thing is this is a problem we're seeing already. If Nintendo can't see THIS as a problem how are they going to catch the less obvious stuff?

Why the hell can't they just provide the damn option? This elitist "we're making the decision for you" bullsh!t is exactly why Nintendo's market share keeps shrinking. Plus you figure with the online disaster last gen they would realize that no one gives a sh!t if NINTENDO saves money. I'm supposed to accept having my options comprimised so that Nintendo saves money? I'm not a stock holder. What the f*ck do I care? I know when I was playing Mario Kart: Double Dash I wasn't thinking "boy I'm sure glad that Nintendo saved a few bucks by forcing me to invite my friends over every time I want to play."

Agree 100%

Quote
Its laughable that there actually are people that believe not including HD display options on a next gen system can spell doom lol. HD tvs is a niche market. The cost of owning such a tv is still too high for the average consumer and will not come down significintly till after the next gen. How many years has HD tvs been around already and the price is still out of the average joe's price range. Also, if some family were to jump into an HD tv display, more often then not it'll be going in some type of family room which will be swarmed with people on the regular.

Well, 12.5% own HD now. Next year, I'd venture a guess at 25%. The next year probably, and most likely 45% as prices drop on HD tvs. In three years, the Revolution will be in it's 2nd year of existence meaning it has to exist for about 3 more years in the next generation, without a major force, HD, while it's two adversaries have HD available ahead of the surge. Yep, real smart move...

PaLaDiN · « **Reply #54 on:** June 11, 2005, 10:02:20 AM »

"But being FORCED to save money when you might want to spend the money sucks and it's the sort of thing that could make a developer ignore the Rev."

I've calmed down a little and I'm thinking this might not be as bad as I thought it was.

How hard is it to downgrade the games, really? It's just a matter of resolution, right? Which means it should be pretty much no work at all to downgrade. Developers shouldn't be pissed off because Nintendo doesn't seem to be making them do anything extra... unlike Sony and Microsoft.

If HD is as expensive as people say it is, then it sounds like it's going to be much harder to port Rev games to PS3 and X360 than vice versa. I keep getting this nagging feeling that there's a reason MS and Sony are requiring developers to include HD, and the reason is that they'd rather leave it out. If that's the case and Nintendo plays its cards right then they might actually end up becoming the PS2 of the next gen.

Lastly, I'm still not convinced HD gaming is what it's cracked up to be. I've seen HDTV's and they don't impress me. I've upped the resolution on tons of games and not been able to really tell the difference. If it's really framerate-intensive like Julian makes it out to be, I'd rather they stayed at SD and did the "anything they want" thing he's claiming is possible at that resolution. Rev games might actually end up having better graphics than the others that way.

BigJim · « **Reply #55 on:** June 11, 2005, 11:27:08 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: jasonditz
what are they defining as HD? I'm not entirely clear on it.

HD is considered basically anything that's 720p or better.

thepoga · « **Reply #56 on:** June 11, 2005, 01:01:00 PM »

Has anyone here watched an HDTV? I saw friggin Animal Planet and it was amazing to watch. The squirrels man, the squirrels.

At the very least, the Revolution should support the 480 P (like the GC). And they should actually sell the cables for that IN the stores instead of just on their website. HD isn't a required thing, but it's nice to have. Would you rather watch the VHS or the DVD of a movie.

Also, I really wanted Nintendo to start supporting the widescreen formats more. The higher definition of F-Zero in widescreen was a sight to behold. It also helped the actual gameplay because of the ability to SEE more.
The graphics of Viewtiful Joe on an HDTV was amazing. The colors and everything really popped out. It looks really clear, and the cube only runs 480 p.

Overall, I think it's a mistake, but not the BIG mistake that will doom Nintendo. The frustrating thing for a developer would be to have to design multiplatform games the same for two, but not the same for another one.

Renny · « **Reply #57 on:** June 11, 2005, 01:56:35 PM »

A point that was raised earlier in the thread that most of you seem to be glossing over: this will hurt 3rd party sales of Rev games because people will see Rev versions of multiplatform games as weak. As it is, people think the PS2 has better graphics than the Cube. If the PS3 really does have significantly better graphics it'll be a hard sell for Nintendo and multiplatform games just as it is now and probably even worse. Now they'll be more dependent on exclusive games, which are hard enough to come by this generation.

It does truly seem like Nintendo is vying for the role of 'the second console' and not aiming any higher. Being 'the second console' hasn't gotten the Cube to second place, though. Nintendo will have to price the Rev more competitively than the Cube to convince the majority of gamers that it's worth owning two consoles. If they could combine those sales with the mass audience they're intent on courting they could establish themselves well in the next generation.

Speaking for myself though; I'm content to relegate the Rev to being my 'second console.' I like what Nintendo is doing with bringing down the cost of games, providing downloadable games and introducing new input for games. But why not have the choice? Having options is what sells the DS, as Nintendo themselves have said. With Sony and Microsoft forcing HD with their systems, the option of HD on the developer and consumer end should be selling the Rev.

Mr. Saturn · « **Reply #58 on:** June 11, 2005, 02:13:21 PM »

I could have sworn the whole and term was coined by Nintendo as a way of showing they were going to have good first party support and third party support, kids games and mature games I never actually thought it meant you were supposed to buy a Revolution in addition to another next gen console? Ugh now I'm just confused. BTW this post was in response to the beginning of the thread in case anyone's wondering.

nemo_83 · « **Reply #59 on:** June 11, 2005, 03:20:21 PM »

I'm going to take a stab at making an analogy for this.

Would you rather play Dreamcast in HD (if it were possible), or would you rather play GameCube in standard definition? Which one would look better to you? Gamecube would still kill the Dreamcast's visuals.

Nintendo may still really do a successor to the VB. Would you rather have stereoscopic visuals as an option for any game instead of high definition? Well get your salt ready and click the following.

new virtual boy

a better pic

BlackNMild2k1 · « **Reply #60 on:** June 11, 2005, 04:24:13 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
Nintendo may still really do a successor to the VB. Would you rather have stereoscopic visuals as an option for any game instead of high definition? Well get your salt ready and click the following.

new virtual boy

a better pic

Do I get to start the new page...

anyway WTF is that?? is that from famitsu? I(we) need more details on that one.......

this can't be a real pic, that helmet doesn't look real wearable

oh, and thanx for the 'hot' links

mac<censored> · « **Reply #61 on:** June 11, 2005, 05:13:22 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Renny
A point that was raised earlier in the thread that most of you seem to be glossing over: this will hurt 3rd party sales of Rev games because people will see Rev versions of multiplatform games as weak.

Ironically, the actual effect of not having HD may well be an increase in the quality of the Revolution's graphics, because developers won't have to limit their geometry etc. to accommodate the slower processing that would happen in HD mode (because of fill-rate issues or whatever).

Of course history does seem to show that the public cares little about reality, and are as likely to base their buying decision on one of Kutaragi's hallucinatory fits as anything else...

mac<censored> · « **Reply #62 on:** June 11, 2005, 05:33:46 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: thepoga
Has anyone here watched an HDTV? I saw friggin Animal Planet and it was amazing to watch. The squirrels man, the squirrels.

HDTV is definitely amazing (though arguably less so for games because of the limitations of the source artwork) -- everything looks real and you suddenly realize the conventional TV you thought looked great a minute earlier actually looks like crap.

It's very disturbing watching something like an interview on HDTV though. Every zit and pore becomes very obvious, as does poorly applied makeup! It's much worse than reality because of such practices as intense lighting and facial closeups (which I guess to some degree are intended to work around the drawbacks of conventional television). When they go for one of those ultra-closeups (super popular on Japanese TV) I cringe...

Bloodworth · « **Reply #63 on:** June 11, 2005, 05:56:10 PM »

Well remember that face you're looking at is magnified greatly over actual size.

nemo_83 · « **Reply #64 on:** June 11, 2005, 06:24:09 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
Nintendo may still really do a successor to the VB. Would you rather have stereoscopic visuals as an option for any game instead of high definition? Well get your salt ready and click the following.

new virtual boy

a better pic

Do I get to start the new page...

anyway WTF is that?? is that from famitsu? I(we) need more details on that one.......

this can't be a real pic, that helmet doesn't look real wearable

oh, and thanx for the 'hot' links

I've heard it was a fake, but this and the Nintendoon video could turn out to viral marketing campaigns. This would make the best counter to HD; the option of 3D. If they did it right you would not only see 3D, but there would be a gyro inside the helmet allowing you to look around; everywhere you look there would be screen.

Galford · « **Reply #65 on:** June 11, 2005, 06:46:23 PM »

If I remember correctly, according to the original ATSC specs,
everthing above 480i is considered HD.

The GC supported 480p, I expect Rev to also. While not bone crushing
feature, lack of could become a major handicap towards the end of Rev's
lifespan. Isn't the Rev suppose to support VGA monitors???

If this is true, it shows how Nintendo is being short
siighted, again....

Truthliesn1seyes · « **Reply #66 on:** June 11, 2005, 07:02:03 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford

If this is true, it shows how Nintendo is being short
siighted, again....

Short sighted might be how you label it but I see it as profet oriented.

Mario · « **Reply #67 on:** June 11, 2005, 07:05:24 PM »

I'm sure Nintendo Revolution games will still look GREAT on HDTVs. I'd never even heard of any of this high definition crap before Microsoft started talking about it anyway.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #68 on:** June 11, 2005, 07:10:06 PM »

This topic is crap...I remember when this forum was about talking games, not stupid freaking TVs...

(I have an HDTV and I REALLY don't care...The games will look great either way)

The Omen · « **Reply #69 on:** June 11, 2005, 08:35:12 PM »

I'll still buy the Rev., but what you're not understanding Bill, is others won't, simply because Nintendo will not offer the same choices. And sure, that doesn't bother you, but I personally don't want to be forced to get 50% of third party games on other platforms. Nintendo has put themselves in this position, and they need to overshoot their goals in order to come out even in the race. And you all can go on and on about how much money Nintendo makes, but why the hell should I care if it's not being spent to benefit me, the customer? Get the blinders off for god sake.

Quote
Unless this is Perrin saying ignorant things again, this is moronic.

She does annoy me to no end. A dumb talking head. Hopefully, she was misinformed.

anubis6789 · « **Reply #70 on:** June 11, 2005, 08:46:11 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford
If I remember correctly, according to the original ATSC specs,
everthing above 480i is considered HD.

The GC supported 480p, I expect Rev to also. While not bone crushing
feature, lack of could become a major handicap towards the end of Rev's
lifespan. Isn't the Rev suppose to support VGA monitors???

If this is true, it shows how Nintendo is being short
siighted, again....

Actually all of 480i is standard definition (SD), 480p is enhanced definition, and both 720p and 1080i are high definition. I would also like to clear up something I said earlier, were SD and ED can both be either 4:3 and 16:9 HD can only be 16:9. Just so every one can see what is SD, ED, and HD are here is a link.

If the statements that say that the REV can hook up to a computer monitor are true the REV would at least have to have some sort of progressive scan to work on most modern PC monitors.

What I find odd is that everyone is upset that the REV may not include HD which not so many people have and not championing the fact that , like I said if the statements that say that the REV can hook up to a computer monitor are true, the REV may have something people have been asking for forever. That feature may be only on the REV. I know many XBOX owners who were upset that the XBOX did not support VGA. What is even more strange about that is that it seems that the xbox was originally going to support VGA but MS probably took out to make the XBOX look less like an under powered PC.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #71 on:** June 11, 2005, 09:39:54 PM »

"Nintendo may still really do a successor to the VB. Would you rather have stereoscopic visuals as an option for any game instead of high definition?"

I'd rather have both. Though I'm probably more interested in high definition than wearing a silly helmet. If that's Nintendo big secret feature it's pretty gimmicky. It would kind of neat but I don't see everyone rushing to buy a Rev for it or anything. Sony and MS would probably laugh at the concept rather than steal it.

One thing we have to look at is how this is going to affect an employee's sales pitch. Even if they're not biased when telling someone the facts they're going to say "this one doesn't support HD" and that's going to kill some potential Rev sales. Every time I've been in a store and I've overheard a salesman talking with a customer about a potential console purchase the second "no online" or "doesn't have a DVD player" came up for the Cube, the customer immediately narrowed their choice to PS2 or Xbox. Just the idea that Nintendo's console was missing features that BOTH other consoles had turned people off. The only time I've seen a Cube get sold is when the customer specifically asks for one. It doesn't matter if the person has an HDTV or not. Just the fact that the Rev is missing a feature will turn them off. Hell I bought a Progressive Scan DVD player, even though my TV at the time couldn't make use of it, just in case I would get a TV that would support it later on down the road. That's the mentality a lot of people have when they buy electronics because the last thing you want to do is have to rebuy your other electronics if you upgrade your TV or stereo system or whatever. The "I might get an HDTV someday" thought is going to lose Rev sales.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #72 on:** June 12, 2005, 02:06:49 AM »

I'd never even heard of any of this high definition crap before Microsoft started talking about it anyway.

Unless I'm confused you're Australian and therefore HDTV is of no concern to you anyway. Does PAL even support that? I know I can get my PC to display 1024x768 on a TV and it doesn't seem to miss any pixels but does PAL support proper HD?

Mario · « **Reply #73 on:** June 12, 2005, 04:53:17 AM »

Yes that's probably why KDR, i'm not sure if PAL even has HD actually, and I definately don't see it taking off anytime soon.

Ian: You're acting as though Revolution games won't run on HDTVs at all. Guess what? They will! They'll look beautiful too! I may be a bit biased on this subject because I don't live in America, land of the HDTVs, but I see far more benefits to this than what the competitors are doing, which is forcing the developers to throw money away to incorporate HD, as well as all the things people have mentioned in this thread, and if it really did make the framerate take a hit there's no way i'd be playing my games on HD TV even if I had one.

Aussiedude · « **Reply #74 on:** June 12, 2005, 05:09:25 AM »

Quote

Unless I'm confused you're Australian and therefore HDTV is of no concern to you anyway. Does PAL even support that? I know I can get my PC to display 1024x768 on a TV and it doesn't seem to miss any pixels but does PAL support proper HD?

Sorry but you are confused. PAL does not support HD and neither does NTSC (Never Twice the Same Colour LOL).

The new system for HD in USA is the inferier American-developed ATSC standard.
The new system for HD in Australia is DVB-T; is proving to be a very high quality system and is being used in many countries around the world.

Analogue (PAL) broadcasting will cease in Australia around 2008, so there is no way I will be buying the Revolution as all TV's by 2008 will support HD.
This is a @#$%ing studid decision by Nintendo.

Australian digital television features include:

'Ghost free' reception
Widescreen 16:9 pictures
Standard Definition pictures (SD)
High Definition pictures (HD)
Digital television will be transmitted with MPEG digital stereo sound and/or Dolby Digital Sound (2, 4 or 5 channels)
Multi-channel programming on ABC and SBS
Closed Captioning of programs for the hearing impaired
Electronic Program Guides (EPGs) with 'now & next' program information for some channels
In selected markets, on-screen program guide channel with today's program information.
In selected markets, HD demonstration channels
Multi-camera views and enhancements during selected programs

News:

Author Topic: No Hi-def resolution, Nintendo's cost benefit analysis (Read 59388 times)