Nintendo Revolution 728mhz

[Cmtz]

from ign.com


Insiders stress that Revolution runs on an extension of the Gekko and Flipper architectures that powered GameCube, which is why studios who worked on GCN will have no problem making the transition to the new machine, they say. IBM’s “Broadway” CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube’s Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox’s CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

Revolution’s ATI-provided “Hollywood” GPU clocks in at 243MHz. By comparison, GameCube’s GPU ran at 162MHz, while the GPU on the original Xbox was clocked at 233MHz. Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shader features, as has been speculated.

“The ‘Hollywood’ is a large-scale integrated chip that includes the GPU, DSP, I/O bridge and 3MBs of texture memory,” a studio source told us.

The overall system memory numbers we reported last December have not greatly fluctuated, but new clarifications have surfaced. Revolution will operate using 24MBs of “main” 1T-SRAM. It will additionally boast 64MBs of “external” 1T-SRAM. That brings the total number of system RAM up to 88MBs, not including the 3MB texture buffer on the GPU. By comparison, GameCube featured 40MBs of RAM not counting the GPU’s on-board 3MBs. The original Xbox included 64MBs total RAM. Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 operate on 512MBs of RAM.

It is not known if the 14MBs of extra D-RAM we reported on last December are in the current Revolution specifications.

Lots of numbers, but what do they all mean? The short answer is that Revolution is exactly as Nintendo has publicly stated: a console whose primary focus is not quadrupling raw horsepower, but rather a potentially gameplay-changing new controller. Nintendo’s new hardware supports this innovative new peripheral and not the other way around. Looking back, it makes sense.

Sources close to Nintendo have, however, told IGN Revolution that the company was experimenting with in-development GameCube controllers very similar to Revolution’s freestyle-style unit. The problem research and development faced at the time was that these controllers encountered unavoidable latency issues, which made them nearly incompatible with fast-paced software. Apparently the Big N overcame this particular hurdle.

So now that the specs are know what do you guys think. This falls short next to the original xbox.

[Darren870]

Im fine with that. I look at it like this, if the gamecube could do RE 4, then all rev cames should be atleast that. Which is good enough for me.

[max 330 mega]

Im fine with that. I look at it like this, if the gamecube could do RE 4, then all rev cames should be atleast that. Which is good enough for me.
i totally agree. i think that since the rev's going to be so similiar to the gamecube, developers will already be familiar with the technology, and will be able to produce games that look incredibly refined, and more importantly have incredibly tight gameplay as well.

[Rev. Link]

Prettier doesn't necessarily equal more fun. 360 games are gorgeous, certainly, but most folks that have played them just say they're prettier Xbox games.

Revolution will be something new and different, which is cool, and while not offering a massive leap in graphical power, it's still a good step beyond GameCube. That equals all good, in my book.

[cyberfluxor]

Well, as general rule of computation in software and hardware development: You can minimize space for more speed or use more space to lose speed.

I hope that idea can somewhat pull you away from the frequency portion of hardware design. I'm not concerned with the frequency, but what it can actually compuate in those passes. The not so fast CPU isn't a bad idea if they can generate an efficient kernal/core for their system that can do the complex operations of todays games.

As for the space, if the hardware can handle high volumes of data for computation avoiding over-use of memory, they can sure do so to cut costs and give us lower prices. :)

Last, I'm sold on the inventive part of the system. Todays graphics are so high end that most basic games are just astonishing. If they created some more 2D Mario games they would be so amazing it would blow others away. If you want the most high tech gadget then do your thing and purchase a PS3 or Xbox360, but if you want some creative and different go Nintendo.

I don't hate Sony or Microsoft, it's just Nintendo has been doing a nice job all these years for me. I plan to get other systems down the road too, but the fight will be rough. It'll take the competition a fierce battle to win me over.

[Juganawt]

sounds like the controller's going to make or break the machine.

it's a HUGE gamble, especially when people are underwhelmed by the lack of a visual upgrade that the new generation holds as it is... Will people really care about a new system that looks no different to the generation just gone?

I hope it works out for Nintendo, I wouldn't want the Revolution to be Nintendo's console curtain call.

[njiska]

sounds like the controller's going to make or break the machine.

it's a HUGE gamble, especially when people are underwhelmed by the lack of a visual upgrade that the new generation holds as it is... Will people really care about a new system that looks no different to the generation just gone?

I hope it works out for Nintendo, I wouldn't want the Revolution to be Nintendo's console curtain call.

Exactly, it's all about the gameplay. But more importanly these parts also mean the system will be cheap, probably very cheap and if it can pull off an outstanding experience with the new controller then it'll be a must buy.

[jezt]

It really seems as if nintendo is attempting to change the whole playfield, rather than try to keep up with the players on the current field. For this I applaud them. I love nintendo, and I hope this proves to be the most succesfull gaming system for them since the SNES. If there is any company out there that has the right to alter the gaming industry it is nintendo. The more I hear of the Revolution, the more I think this is going to be one hell of a run for em. 8-)

[§ Gideon §]

Hehe. I sincerely hope none of us care about these specs. Numbers always mean so little. Furthermore, we post on the Digital Press message boards--you know, the place where people still play Pong (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=82063).

Godspeed and game on.

[Tan]

the numbers don't mean much, it's all about who's working with them, the xbox vid card is just a souped up geforce 3, but look at games like doom3, far cry and forza just amazing what they can do with smaller numbers. specialized set-in-stone hardware specs breed efficiency and innovation

with 5 years of gamecube developement under their belts who knows what the future holds.

[Raedon]

just give me more monkey ball dangit..

[poloplayr]

couldn't care less.

[Mayhem]

Insiders stress that Revolution runs on an extension of the Gekko and Flipper architectures that powered GameCube, which is why studios who worked on GCN will have no problem making the transition to the new machine, they say. IBM’s “Broadway” CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube’s Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox’s CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

As Tan said, you can't really compare. The Rev and the Xbox will be using entirely different CPUs so Mhz numbers don't mean squat. Only if you look at the actual performance stats. And from that, the Rev will be more powerful than the Xbox imo.

[njiska]

Insiders stress that Revolution runs on an extension of the Gekko and Flipper architectures that powered GameCube, which is why studios who worked on GCN will have no problem making the transition to the new machine, they say. IBM’s “Broadway” CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation. By comparison, GameCube’s Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz. The original Xbox’s CPU was clocked at 733MHz. Meanwhile, Xbox 360 runs three symmetrical cores at 3.2GHz.

As Tan said, you can't really compare. The Rev and the Xbox will be using entirely different CPUs so Mhz numbers don't mean squat. Only if you look at the actual performance stats. And from that, the Rev will be more powerful than the Xbox imo.

Now why should we trust someone who travels the world molesting children when it comes to preformence? LOL

Actually you've made a point that i had hoped would never need to be made again. Architectures make all the difference and IBM chips are vastly different then Intel chips. Not as much as Steve Jobs use to claim, but it can be a noticable difference.

[n8littlefield]

Quick question on that article. Later on, it says this:


Whether or not Revolution is, in fact, a vehicle for the new freestyle controller or not, systems specs rarely tell the whole story. We would remind readers that during an era when polygon numbers meant everything, GameCube's polygon peaks were lower than PlayStation 2 and Xbox. However, few would disagree with the assertion that Resident Evil 4 - a title developed from the ground-up for Nintendo's system -- was one of the prettiest games of the generation.


Is that true? I always was told in terms of power/polygons that it went Xbox>Cube>PS2. They seem to be putting the cube at the bottom of the rankings...

[Mayhem]

In terms of sheer physical peak (as in the top number possible) the PS2 was actually higher than the Cube. But in real terms of performance and sustainability, the Cube beat the PS2.

[googlefest1]

I felt that you don’t really need to get any better than the xbox in terms of graphics

as much as I don’t like nintendo the company i think they had the right idea when coming up with the specifications for their new system

to me it totally looks like they will be making money on hardware sales AND i think games on hardware close to xbox specs can look just as pretty as what will be seen on the 360 and ps3 - some games on the xbox look amazing and comparable to what I have seen on the 360 so far. Im sure this system won’t have much of a problem competing on the "looks" front (with many games). So I agree with what some one said before that it looks like the controller will make or break the system.

Also - im positive that the company is not going to over look the need for a back up plan if the controller will end up being hated. I also wont be surprised to see an "alternative" (more common) style controller for sale.

Originaly i thought nintendo is not going to do to well with this system - now im begining to think otherwise

[c0ldb33r]

I couldn't care less about hardware specs. I'm just more interested in the software. I think the Big-N is making a good decision. Keep the price low, release excellent software, and you will make a mint. It's worked wonder for the DS. Here's hoping they actually do release excellent software ;)

*crosses fingers for a good rev launch*

[poloplayr]

there's been rumours that Wavebirds will work from the getgo and that they'd be released for the Revo.

[Nature Boy]

I don't really care about the graphics of it unless they look *way* behind the PS3/360 stuff. Then it becomes hard to shell out money for something new that doesn't look it (for Gamecube quality graphics it'll be cheaper for me to continue buying old GC games after all).

What I care about is what the system can *do* - if a PS3/360 is able to pull off types of games that aren't possible on the Rev because of the hardware (because, say, it requires 1000s and 1000s of AI controlled beings, and the Rev can't handle the math involved) then the Rev is less appealing to me.

In the end, though, this pre-console hype with all the specs and marketing means nothing to me when it comes to buy my first next gen console. Games and price, which I don't *see* until it launches, are what I care about most. Specs mean squat.

[SirDrexl]

Well, we have to remember that this system won't support HD. Some of the extra power the other systems have is used for running the games at a higher resolution. If they don't have to get the games running smoothly enough in 720p or higher, they could still have decent graphics.

That said, I'm still a little concerned when it comes to third party development, mainly with ports. If they make games that have to be watered down graphically for the Nintendo system (not just in pixel resolution but also in things like polygon counts, texture quality, and effects), it could really affect sales and thus hurt the system.

[keiblerfan69]

Revo games could look like SNES games and I would be happy. The controller is the innovation. The hard part is trying to convince a graphics whore to like it.

[Sylentwulf]

As has been previously mentioned, the gamecube had good graphics. If this system is "ONLY" twice as powerful, I don't think anyone is going to be complaining about the graphics.

As long as nintendo has it's slew of first party games to contend with, it's ALWAYS going to be a second system for everyone. So whether your first system is a 360, or a ps3, EVERYONE'S second system is going to be a revolution. And I imagine that's what they're shooting for.

edit - and of course, the parent OMFG, the nintendo console is half the price of this 360 thing, and the nintendo one has mario!

[n8littlefield]

I think the power is fine given they aren't doing high-def this round. For the PS3 and 360 to be powerful enough to throw around the textures and detail needed for highdef - they need the power. If the Revolution is roughly 2x the Cube's power, that is more than enough strength to put up some beautiful graphics.

On the controller issue. The Revolution has Gamecube ports, so obviously Wavebirds will work for Cube games at the very least. Nintendo already has announced there will be a more traditional controller, either separately or as a shell for the remote to slide into for games that just don't work well for the nunchuck.

Presumably we'll see at E3. Afterall, they have to make something compatible with NES/SNES/TG16/GEN/N64 controllers now as well.

[Joker T]

Nobody should have expected Revolution to be a power house of a system, as said its about a unique gameplay experience. Not graphics.

[Bojay1997]

I guess short term this will be fine, but I can't imagine the Rev having a long shelf life with these specs and no HD support. On the other hand, I guess they have always done this on the handheld side and somehow beat far superior systems despite not having anywhere near the power. I suppose if Nintendo buys into the Microsoft model of four year console cycles instead of the previous 5-6, they will be in a good position for the first couple of years because developers can get up to speed very quickly and deliver what are typically thought of as 2nd and 3rd generation titles as opposed to less slick launch titles. This really means the Rev is going to fall into the GC trap of being primarily Nintendo first party supported which is maybe ok, but I can't imagine a lot of companies wanting to go multiplatform on something that is more like a half generation better than the GC as opposed to 360 and PS3 which are clearly next generation. Hopefully the novel controller will result in third parties doing some really cool stuff sort of like on the DS.

[Rev. Link]

Oh noes! Teh Rev is only twice as powerful as GC? Then it must only be a half generation advancement! /sarcasm

Gimme a break! The only people who are worried about Rev games not looking "next gen" enough are graphics whores and Johnny-come-lately mainstream "gamers" whose first systems were PlayStations.

[Nature Boy]

Gimme a break! The only people who are worried about Rev games not looking "next gen" enough are graphics whores and Johnny-come-lately mainstream "gamers" whose first systems were PlayStations.

That sort of statement is Nintendo fan boy rhetoric. I'm not a graphics whore, I just refuse to shell out next gen money for nothing but a different control scheme, just like I refused to shell out next gen money to Atari when the 5200/7800 seemed to have nothing but the same games I'd already played (and I was just fine playing 'em on my VCS).

The only people *really* worried about how Rev games look at this point are some Nintendo fans, as the majority of the game buying public won't care about anything Rev related until they see it in stores. I'm personally not as worried now that I'm aware of the extra power needed for HD on PS3/360 and since the Rev isn't supporting that it doesn't need it, but I'm still curious as to what we're gonna see.

[n8littlefield]

I'm normally not the type to encourage reading IGN stuff, but really their mailbox that was posted today on the revolution sight is a really fair assessment of those tech specs. In a nut shell, they go on for about half a page describing why the specs can be misleading.

Definately worth a read.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I'm buying a Revolution, on launch day if I can manage, reguardless of the systems specs. It's just not a factor that I really care about. The previous point about CPU design vs CPU speed is spot on. Unfortunately, there is a possibilty that higher system stat numbers (whether they yeild greater performance or not) will influence those of uninformed opinion, and they'll shop Sony or MS in search of the promised greener pastures. Who can tell really? All I know is that, IMO mind you, the 360 has completely and utterly failed to impress, the PS3 is at least a whole year away (Worldwide in Nov my ass! Ask MS how their "Worldwide" 360 launch went.) not to mention most likely will be ridiculously expensive and the PSP is a glorified, rather pricey paper-weight. (To quote everyone's favorite Sith Lord "I find your lack of games... disturbing.") I'm thinking Nintendo doesn't need much to compete with 'em. The Rev controller is actually overkill.

[unwinddesign]

I'm buying a Revolution, on launch day if I can manage, reguardless of the systems specs. It's just not a factor that I really care about. The previous point about CPU design vs CPU speed is spot on. Unfortunately, there is a possibilty that higher system stat numbers (whether they yeild greater performance or not) will influence those of uninformed opinion, and they'll shop Sony or MS in search of the promised greener pastures. Who can tell really? All I know is that, IMO mind you, the 360 has completely and utterly failed to impress, the PS3 is at least a whole year away (Worldwide in Nov my ass! Ask MS how their "Worldwide" 360 launch went.) not to mention most likely will be ridiculously expensive and the PSP is a glorified, rather pricey paper-weight. (To quote everyone's favorite Sith Lord "I find your lack of games... disturbing.") I'm thinking Nintendo doesn't need much to compete with 'em. The Rev controller is actually overkill.

There's so much wrong with this post that I'm not even going to try and make sense of it.

[neo-zen]

i have a feeling the war is going to be between the 360 and the revo this time around.
i think the ps3 will be 3rd.
im at a loss for who will be number one though...

[dreamcaster]

Power and features are largely irrelevant - a console's success is based largely on the strength and impact of it's marketing.

I mean, taking the DC as an example, it's market performance was directly proportional to the amount of advertising it received. The DC held it's own in North America where it boasted a solid and aggressive marketing compaign.

In Europe and Australia where there was no marketing whatsoever (and crap distribution to boot), the DC failed horribly.

If the Revolution is to succeed, it's going to need a strong, multi-faceted marketing campaign that does it's best to show that 'this is the direction gaming is taking', according to Nintendo, and 'this is why YOU should own one' - targeting it at the mass market.

The iPod led the way for making a big impact, and invoked a change, in how people listen to their music, and what it could change in their music's portable potential. Nintendo needs to do something similar if they want people to stand up, take note, and most importantly, buy into what they 'should' buy as the choice gaming system.

You have to admit, Nintendo's biggest problem, is that no-one really gives a shit about them anymore - at least not to the extent the public did with the NES and SNES (and N64 to a lesser extent).

Sure, your console can do wonderful things - but if the consumer isn't there to take the bait you are offering - your efforts will go unrewarded.

I put this to you Nintendo: "MAKE THE MAINSTREAM PUBLIC AND MEDIA INTERESTED IN YOUR CONSOLE"

They have the unique, and potentially innovative hardware, to do something different - the next step is to make people want it.

Now onto my other concern - the system's power. I'm not one to care greatly about system specs, so long as there are games to justify the console's existence and power. But I am concerned that they may be limiting themselves as to what they can create. It'd be unfortunate if Nintendo found themselves coming up with a brilliant idea, but realising that, "damn, this would be much more workable if we had just that bit more power".

A part of me quesitons that, if the Rev is only a minor techological increase, couldn't they just attempt this new controller on the GCN? Why go to the expense of creating a new console, when they could mroe cheaply revitalise an existing one.

I'm not saying this is a fact, just postulating a possibility.

[SirDrexl]

At first I was thinking the same thing, but I think they want to wipe the slate clean with a new system. The GameCube is what it is to the public, and there just doesn't seem to be a way to change people's minds.

Also, making a new console allows them to fix some issues the other console had. They can go to a larger disc format which will allow them to make the system play DVDs (not important to me but important to some), fix the playing-copied-games-over-the-network-adapter exploit, make the design more high tech-looking, do built-in wireless, etc. I hope they'll also support Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, and that will need a new output on the back. Besides those things, they can add some more power.

[Daria]

A part of me quesitons that, if the Rev is only a minor techological increase, couldn't they just attempt this new controller on the GCN? Why go to the expense of creating a new console, when they could mroe cheaply revitalise an existing one.


Because it would become just another periphrial that a handfull of games support, and then no one uses it again because not a large enough user base bought it in the first place. To truely make something like this work you HAVE to package it with the system ensuring that every single one of your customers already owns it. Otherwise you're looking at another Eye Toy.

[SNKFan75]

I like the approach Nintendo is taking to the next generation of consoles. It is refreshing to know that when buying the Revolution, you actually have the ability to play all of Nintendos games. I also like the fact that the revolution looks compact and sleek. I am looking forward to seeing how the controllers react to certain older games.

The other fact I like is that you will be able to play cross-platform games (ie NEC and Sega). Hopefully this will be a trend with other companies and then we can all enjoy games no matter what system they come out for. Just imagine playing GOW or Gran Turismo 4 on the 360.

SNKFan75

[n8littlefield]

I think this next generation battle of consoles is going to a really tough match to call. I think that in Japan, Nintendo could EASILY end up being the number one console again. The DS sales are insane, and if that can ride that wave of innovation, I think the Revolution could beat Sony in Japan.

In the US and Europe, I think it's going to depend entirely on pricing. If the PS3 comes out at the same price of the XB360 - then I think Sony will take first, MS and Nintendo will continue to battle for second. If Sony comes out too expensive, I think they will lose the US market.

The strength of the system is not that important at this point. Most people do not have high-def TV's, and I really think Sony and MS are making a big mistake focusing so heavily on that as a selling point.

[Rockman Neo]

The strength of the system is not that important at this point. Most people do not have high-def TV's, and I really think Sony and MS are making a big mistake focusing so heavily on that as a selling point.

I agree. Unless everyone suddenly get's an HD television and has an extra $600-700 to spare afterwards, I seriously doubt the 360 and PS3 will sell more than half of the GameCube's worldwide sales.

[petewhitley]

I seriously doubt the 360 and PS3 will sell more than half of the GameCube's worldwide sales.

LOL LOL LOL

I'm putting that in my sig.

[Sweater Fish Deluxe]

Yeah, I also personally really think this is a good idea for Nintendo. It seems clear to me that that they're just sort of trying to do the same thing with a console that they
ve always done so successfully with their handhelds. Another thing about the fact that the Revolution is so similar to the Gamecube is that it keeps the price of the development kit very very low ($2000), which should not only encourage larger developers to jump on board, but will also hopefully bring in some (preferably a lot) of tiny dev houses or even PC developers. This could be great, like a return to the good old days of 8- and 16-bit consoles and computers. There's even the possibility of online distribution for games to make the platform even more attractive to those tiny developers. Just great.

I thought I'd read that the Revolution would be compatible with external USB hard drives, which should be good enough.

Also, as for controllers. Check out the Hori Gameboy Player controller from the Gamecube. That'd be pretty good for most of the older systems. Certainly better than the Revolution remote turned on its side as has been suggested.

Anyway, the Revolution is the first system I'll be buying since the Dreamcast, so I'm sure it's horsepower will be more than enough to impress me.


...word is bondage...

[c0ldb33r]

There's even the possibility of online distribution for games to make the platform even more attractive to those tiny developers.
Hey yeah downloadable games would be awesome (non emulation ones at least)

[n8littlefield]

I thought I'd read that the Revolution would be compatible with external USB hard drives, which should be good enough.


Yeah - there was a story on CNN recently about the lower prices of Revolution games and it did have a direct quote from someone at Nintendo that for storage they would be supporting the USB port for additional storage like harddrives.

[Neo Rasa]

You guys realize that IGN article is almost a year old and that they've just been updating the date on it to pass it off a "new" material right? It's pretty much all speculation. The ever-retarded Slashdot picked it up as a "new" article a couple of days ago so everyone thinks it's current again.

What is new is what Sweater Fish Deluxe mentioned, you should be able to hook up just about any USB storage device to the Revolution.

[Chuplayer]

So now that the specs are know what do you guys think. This falls short next to the original xbox.

XBOX has a CISC CPU. Nintendo consoles have been RISC in the past. There's a good chance the Revolution will be RISC, too. There's a difference between the two. Even though the GCN is mhz-wise less than the XBOX, both systems get about the same amount of work done thanks to Nintendo's RISC processor.

If the Revolution's CPU is indeed RISC, then it's probably going to end up more powerful than the XBOX in that department.

[dreamcaster]

A part of me quesitons that, if the Rev is only a minor techological increase, couldn't they just attempt this new controller on the GCN? Why go to the expense of creating a new console, when they could mroe cheaply revitalise an existing one.


Because it would become just another periphrial that a handfull of games support, and then no one uses it again because not a large enough user base bought it in the first place. To truely make something like this work you HAVE to package it with the system ensuring that every single one of your customers already owns it. Otherwise you're looking at another Eye Toy.
Actually, I thought Mega CD or 32X was a closer analogy. :P

As I said, just a thought.

[smokehouse]

I think that Nintendo is taking this round differently. If you compare the 360 and PS3 to the muscle cars of yesteryear, they are horribly powerful and can drive well in a straight line. The Revo will be less raw HP, more handling, breaks and suspension.

I know this analogy isn’t perfect but you get the point. It takes a MASSIVE amount of processing power to do full time HD video, this is something the Revo will not even have to worry about. The same goes with some of the features tied into a 360 or (possibly) the PS3. The Revo should be less bogged down without the 300 different multimedia functions MS and Sony are dumping in their systems.

It just seems that Nintendo is taking the “If I can’t win at their game, I’ll create my own” approach. Instead of taking MS and Sony head on, they are just doing their own thing.

[n8littlefield]

So now that the specs are know what do you guys think. This falls short next to the original xbox.

XBOX has a CISC CPU. Nintendo consoles have been RISC in the past. There's a good chance the Revolution will be RISC, too. There's a difference between the two. Even though the GCN is mhz-wise less than the XBOX, both systems get about the same amount of work done thanks to Nintendo's RISC processor.

If the Revolution's CPU is indeed RISC, then it's probably going to end up more powerful than the XBOX in that department.

You hit it right on the head. The Revolution chipset is supposedly based on the exact same architecture as the Cube, but faster, so I think RISC is to be expected.

One of the advantages, as IGN has actually pointed out, is imagine the next gen of consoles if there was absolutely no learning curve for developers. That's what Nintendo is doing. They are saying "here is hardware you already know, but better" so that developers can worry less about programming and more on the games. It actually sounds like a pretty solid strategy to me.

[gepeto]

This is what kills me. Is there a double standard for Nintendo. When the dreamcast was released the powers that be put down the system because of its so called lack of power. This I believe greatly influenced the masses and lead to an early dreamcast death. Why should the Nintendo be any different.

I want nintendo to do well. They been hyping quaility vs quantity ever since the 64. They lost both times. I just feel a disconnect between nintendo and the public.

They got the handheld market lock down. But as far as systems go I am starting to get that 3 strikes and your out feel.

On a deeper note. The loyal fan base that nintendo had is just about all grown up. I sense they had there fill of mario and such. The newer generation I am not getting the nintendo vibe from. If I was a nintendo veep I wouldn't know where to begin. I don't know about you but the last must have gamecube for me was metriod prime echoes 2.
That was over a year ago.

On a deeper deeper note:) I have 100plus n64 games yet the system rarely played the least out of all the systems I have. Was the n64 era not that memorable?

Sorry but when I saw the revolution specs I started wondering how the mighty have fallen because I remember when nintendo could do no wrong.

[Mayhem]

This is what kills me. Is there a double standard for Nintendo. When the dreamcast was released the powers that be put down the system because of its so called lack of power. This I believe greatly influenced the masses and lead to an early dreamcast death. Why should the Nintendo be any different.

Indeed, in my mind at least, the Dreamcast in some ways was more powerful than the PS2.

[sabre2922]

This is what kills me. Is there a double standard for Nintendo. When the dreamcast was released the powers that be put down the system because of its so called lack of power. This I believe greatly influenced the masses and lead to an early dreamcast death. Why should the Nintendo be any different.

Indeed, in my mind at least, the Dreamcast in some ways was more powerful than the PS2.

I used to believe that or more to the point I WANTED to believe that.

but no matter how much I luved my DC after playing the Metal Gear Solids, Silent Hills, Tekken 5, Gran Turismo 4 even the PS2 version of RE4 etc I am 95% certain that the Dreamcast could not have produced those graphics up to that level.

Even if the DC had reached a 4th or 5th gen game cycle or even if powerhouse developers like Konami,Capcom or Namco had 4-6 years with the DCs dev kits to "mature" with them or whatever.

Thats the interesting thing about Sonys consoles especially the PS2 emotion engine/chip or whatever and now the upcoming PS3 with its CELL processor in that since the processors are more "custom made" or custom talored to that specific console than what are featured in Microsofts consoles it is near impossible to compare the spec sheets and say that well THIS game will look better on THIS system cause there are a couple more Rams here or Megs there or whatever.

The last time specs meant ANYTHING -if they ever truly did- was in the 16-bit generation. IMO the Supernes did show off many more colors when compared to the Genny and the mode-7 stuff was amazing back in the day when the Genesis couldnt do that stuff not to mention the incredible sound chip that Sony made for the Snes that simply blew away the Genesis pitiful sound chip by comparison. No offense Genesis fans :D

To say that the Revolutions graphics or games will suck or be weak because it will "only" be twice as powerful as the Gamecube IS something that only a Nintendo hater or what I like to call "youngling" would be privy too say.
As stated by
Rev. Link most of those are the ones that started out on Playstation One and think they are "hardcore" or a retro gamer when they get on a board and post FF7 RULXXEXOOXER or what the hell ever when they havent even played the damn game but that is an arguement for a different post.

[SNKFan75]

I am just going to wait to see what happens at this years E3 and take it from there. I still feel that Nintendo will always play a factor in the market. Hell, there are plenty of parents that don't like Playstation and MS enough to just buy Nintendo products. With that in mind, Nintendo will always be a contender.

I applaud them for trying something so radical as their new controller. I hope they succeed!

SNKFan75

[crazyjackcsa]

This is what kills me. Is there a double standard for Nintendo. When the dreamcast was released the powers that be put down the system because of its so called lack of power. This I believe greatly influenced the masses and lead to an early dreamcast death. Why should the Nintendo be any different.

Indeed, in my mind at least, the Dreamcast in some ways was more powerful than the PS2.

I used to believe that or more to the point I WANTED to believe that.

but no matter how much I luved my DC after playing the Metal Gear Solids, Silent Hills, Tekken 5, Gran Turismo 4 even the PS2 version of RE4 etc I am 95% certain that the Dreamcast could not have produced those graphics up to that level.

Even if the DC had reached a 4th or 5th gen game cycle or even if powerhouse developers like Konami,Capcom or Namco had 4-6 years with the DCs dev kits to "mature" with them or whatever.

Thats the interesting thing about Sonys consoles especially the PS2 emotion engine/chip or whatever and now the upcoming PS3 with its CELL processor in that since the processors are more "custom made" or custom talored to that specific console than what are featured in Microsofts consoles it is near impossible to compare the spec sheets and say that well THIS game will look better on THIS system cause there are a couple more Rams here or Megs there or whatever.

The last time specs meant ANYTHING -if they ever truly did- was in the 16-bit generation. IMO the Supernes did show off many more colors when compared to the Genny and the mode-7 stuff was amazing back in the day when the Genesis couldnt do that stuff not to mention the incredible sound chip that Sony made for the Snes that simply blew away the Genesis pitiful sound chip by comparison. No offense Genesis fans :D

To say that the Revolutions graphics or games will suck or be weak because it will "only" be twice as powerful as the Gamecube IS something that only a Nintendo hater or what I like to call "youngling" would be privy too say.
As stated by
Rev. Link most of those are the ones that started out on Playstation One and think they are "hardcore" or a retro gamer when they get on a board and post FF7 RULXXEXOOXER or what the hell ever when they havent even played the damn game but that is an arguement for a different post.

I found it starnge that you brought up the SNES vs. Genny debate here, again, those two systems were very very different. The SNES was saddled with a slower chipcouldn't handle the "faster" games ie, the sports games. True, they got around that in the end, but so did developers with the weak Colour Palette. The N64 didn't have a dedicated sound chip. The Saturn could use the sound chip as a graphics chip ( I think Shining Force III was the only game to use it.) The Dreamcast didn't render polygons that you couldn't see (something most systems do) and ran in VGA mode as well. All I'm trying to say is that every system has it's quirks, and that in the end, the playing field gets leveled out by good developers. Could the DC handle the games we see at the end of this Generation the way we see them? Probably not, but it could handle versions of them, much like the XBOX can handle versions of 360 Games. I think chips with fancy names have ZERO to do with it. I think the very fact that nintendo cut out the HD aspect will allow graphics of comparable quality in terms of polys, and effects, just a lower res, which by they isn't as big a deal as people on this board seem to think it is, most people I talk to are still using a standard tv, most with RCA cords, a few with s video and a couple with composite, I'd say in my area less than 1 in 10 have a high def T.V.

[Flack]

That is an old mhz and therefore this belongs in the classic forum. :roll:

[Cmtz]

That is an old mhz and therefore this belongs in the classic forum. :roll:

I agree.

[Rev. Link]

I can't believe we're still talking about this.

I think we're missing the point, here. The Revolution will be twice as powerful - in terms of raw specs - as the GameCube. That's a pretty decent jump, really. I mean, sure, it's not a quantum leap like Sony and Microsoft have made with their new systems, but it's still a good jump. Twice as powerful. Think about that. It's not like they're just repackaging GC with the motion sensor controller. Anyone who thinks that's what the Rev will be is in complete denial. This machine will be twice as powerful as its predecessor! Think on RE4, then think about how beautiful a game could look on hardware twice the strength of what RE4 was designed for. Rev games are going to look good. Not only good, but better than anything on GC, PS2, and likely Xbox.

You're completely right to think that 360 and PS3 are going to blow Rev away in terms of graphics, but remember that graphics are not the point of the Rev. New ways of playing are.

[AMG]

Nintendo are doing their own thing, on their own terms. I have a lot of respect for that. This move takes a lot of guts.

I'm not going to worry about the specs, for me it's all about the games. This new controller is the selling point, at least for me. If I want cutting edge graphics, I'll pick up the X360 & PS3 (which I also intend to do).

Nintendo have said this will be a cheaper console, both hardware and software wise for the consumer. That sounds good to me, count me in for a launch pick up.

[jezt]

I, for one, think Nintendo is looking towards the future. They are trying to reestablish control over the industry slowly. Not by leaps and bounds, but slowly. Because of the success of the Playstation and X Box brand, Microsoft and Sony have been propelled into a position where they can more or less dictate what the reality of the Console buisness is, Graphically, Power wise, ect. Nintendo is just changing the rules, for now. I think they are more or less trying to gain a foothold on everything by making their product a lot cheaper, and more accesible to a wider variety of consumers. This is only the beginning. I believe that is what Myamoto meant when he mentioned how the future of Gaming may not even be on a T.V screen. I think in the coming years, we will see Nintendo make even bolder moves to alter the face of the console buisness, and ultimately reach the top once again. They have always been inovaters, and they recognize that in order to stay competetive, they must continue to innovate rather than make their next product shinier, prettier, and more powerfull. Games must be fun, and they are trying to make them fun again. (just my two cents)

[Ed Oscuro]

Why doesn't Nintendo just start selling this as an addon for the SNES, their last popular system? Might as well own up to the fact that they're fleecing us LOL

I think the performance will be good for the price (it should match or slightly outperform the original Xbox, which still is a decent looking system, shame the GPU isn't more updated - this reminds me of the dropped NES compatibility which ended up being a liability for the SNES), but there's a chance this will get trounced by the press and in popular opinion as not looking good enough, and of course that'll instantly equate it with a "kids system," not for serious gamers. I hope not, but let's see. I think it's safe to say that some people will have that opinion (but they'll already feel that way if they know about this).

[Lothars]

i have a feeling the war is going to be between the 360 and the revo this time around.
i think the ps3 will be 3rd.
im at a loss for who will be number one though...


I disagree I think it's gonna be between the 360 and ps3 because 360 is now doing decent now and will only get better,

the ps3 is going to be great IMO

the revolution is not going to even be competing with either of them, but I don't hink that's the purpose of the revolution it's more of a step forward for nintendo. I also think that most gamers will also have a revolution

but we will see.

[Damion]

With the price point Nintendo has hinted at for the Rev I can't see a reason for anyone who plays games not to have one. Espically with there back cataloge ready for download whenever you want it.

Unless of course your a specs whore. then of course begs the question of why the hell are you console gaming to begin with.

[Ed Oscuro]

With the price point Nintendo has hinted at for the Rev I can't see a reason for anyone who plays games not to have one.
That really depends; if the games seem gimmicky I don't see myself buying one. I certainly don't consider the catalogue of old games and GC compatibility as a real selling point (already buy old games I like and I have a GC). Everybody will find their own way on this, I'm sure.