Nintendo Revolution Specs Have Been Released

[iignotus]

This is news to me: http://revolution.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html

In all honesty it's a souped-up Gamecube. I don't know if that's good or bad at this point in the game, though I do know it will allow for the Revolution to be priced much cheaper. Here's hoping that Nintendo pulls through and delivers stunning graphics as well as gameplay.

 

[Mudi]

Nintendo appears to actually want to make a profit on the sale of the console. These days that's an 'oddball' approach.

 

[skysnapper]

Kind of dissapointing.. but hey graphics aren't everything.. felt the same about the DS and still do think the DS graphics are a bit rubbish.. but then again its the most fun i have had out of a system in years.

 

[pantera6]

Kind of dissapointing.. but hey graphics aren't everything.. felt the same about the DS and still do think the DS graphics are a bit rubbish.. but then again its the most fun i have had out of a system in years.

​

The ds is great, considering the size of the original ds (without top screen) it is actually rather small. Mario kart, splinter cell, mario 64 and metroid just wont stop amazing me.
I agree that they could have made the graphics slightly more competitive. It will still be good nyway im sure of that, nintendo will have some amazing launch title that will amaze the world. hopefuly it wont be some more minigames like on the ds cos that will just bore all ds users to death.

 

[skysnapper]

Kind of dissapointing.. but hey graphics aren't everything.. felt the same about the DS and still do think the DS graphics are a bit rubbish.. but then again its the most fun i have had out of a system in years.

​

The ds is great, considering the size of the original ds (without top screen) it is actually rather small. Mario kart, splinter cell, mario 64 and metroid just wont stop amazing me.
I agree that they could have made the graphics slightly more competitive. It will still be good nyway im sure of that, nintendo will have some amazing launch title that will amaze the world. hopefuly it wont be some more minigames like on the ds cos that will just bore all ds users to death.

​

Its the idea of swinging a virtual golf club or tennis racket or sword that i think sounds fun. (even though yuo end up looking like an ass! Don't forget to close the windows)

 

[PokeParadox]

It's funny... IGN themselves say "Don't judge based on the clock rate alone" but then go on to say that it's power only lies in between the GCN and the XBOX.
IMO seeing as it is again running a PowerPC based CPU, I reckon that it will be at least as powerful as the Xbox and up to a third moreso.

EDIT: I guess they're just being informationally cautious...

 

[Fishbong]

This isn´t surprising at all. They need a similar hardware if they want it to play Gamecube games. Its close to impossible to emulate each and every chip.

 

[Angel]

The DS though is typical Nintendo fashion. They've never made huge leaps in technology. Gameboy was like the NES, it took then how many years for a successor and it ended up being as good as a SNES, which was dead technology for what, 6 years? And now the DS is basically N64 technology which has been dead for some time as well.

I'm sorry and probably the main reason why I don't like the GBA is for the time it was released, there's no reason it couldn't have had 3d graphics comparable to the Saturn/PS1. And the DS should've had graphics comparable to PS2, like the PSP.

But again it comes down to the games.

As for the Revolution, it's not going to matter, the DS was based on old hardware, the GBA was based on old hardware, so its no suprise the Revolution will be based on old hardware. And it will sell, it will be the games that sell the system, not the sytem itself. It will be huge in Japan because they seem to bust their nut over anything Nintendo does over there, so I don't think they have to worry about anything.

But its' NEXT GENERATION, i want to play NEXT GENERATION GAMES, not the last generation but with a gimmick controller. If i want to play XBOX games, i'll buy games for my XBOX, which it seems that on paper, the Rev is only slightly more powerful than an XBOX.

 

[grahf]

This is going to turn out to be a good move by Nintendo, IMO. This console really is going to be as easy to get start developing for as they say.

EDIT: Angel, on paper the original Gamecube is half as powerful as the Xbox. But it obviously trumps it graphics wise. MHz does not equal graphical capability. Never has, never will.

 

[Angel]

we'll have to wait and see. on paper, i'm not impressed. And i don't know if the cube has extra hardware to help with graphical capabilities

I must be the only person that is not fooled by Nintendo, not looking to buy something only because its "cheap" or allured by the prospect of it playing classic games which i can already play. The Rev. compared to the 360 and PS3 almost seems like a joke. But it will sell because nobody else sees through the crappiness of this system. Nintendo doesn't seem proud of the system, they've kept everything a secret, it's all about the controller and about the ability to play classic games, but they don't say anything about the normal games it will play. Even in the article it stated that they even thought about never revealing the specs of the system.

When your proud of something, you want to show it off, not hide it. Trying to hide it because of being copied by Sony or Microsoft is all Bullshit. Nintendo knows they have nothing new to offer other than a controller. And i'm sorry, but thats nothing to be proud of and i think they know it.

 

[PokeParadox]

It's not a case of being proud... It's a case of "Ooooh that looks like a good idea Nintendo... we can do that!"

In anycase, I do think your are missing the point about the Rev, and I can guess that it would not appeal to you.

I'm personally quite excited to see how this pans out. Yes the controller seems to be gimmicky and it does indeed, look like a TV remote. But if this allow games developers to create fresh and original games then I'm all for it. I'm not saying that I don't appreciate sequels to popular games, or even a good FPS... etc. It's just that the games market is absolutely saturated with THESE games, which in essence, offer the same thing.

I'm just going to keep optimistic that the Rev will deliver...

EDIT: missed out an important word that would have made me say a stupid statement:
"It's just that the games market is absolutely saturated with games..."

Indeed.

EDIT2: Gyah! I'm just supid today... The full sentence reads fine without the first edit! >_>

 

[DaveC]

My guess is this will be cheap, very cheap ($149.00 maybe?). With prices for the 360 at $400, and the PS3 likely even higher this will take the low end market. They are obviously aiming for the low cost market especially since it doesn't support High-def.

 

[Fishbong]

I'm sorry and probably the main reason why I don't like the GBA is for the time it was released, there's no reason it couldn't have had 3d graphics comparable to the Saturn/PS1. And the DS should've had graphics comparable to PS2, like the PSP.

​

Wrong. Back in 2001 there wasn´t a single 3D accelterator for handheld devices, not even a decent 2D one. Not even the Zodiac, 2 years later, was capable of PS1 graphics and it was hightech back then. Not even laptops had 3D accelteration in 2001.
With the fast development of cellphones and other handheld devices there are many mobile 3D chips NOW.

the DS was based on old hardware...

​

Oh, i wasn´t aware of that, so you must be much smarter than me. Can you tell me on which old harware architecture the DS is based on?

I bet not.

I must be the only person that is not fooled by Nintendo...
...But it will sell because nobody else sees through the crappiness of this system.

​

Wow, cheers to you for being soo much more intelligent than me.

But it seems to me that you are related to Magus86 somehow. :rolleyes:

 

[Angel]

what the hell asshole, did i say anything about 3d hardware in a portable?? NO. I stated that when the GBA was released the technology should've been there to do something along those lines. Not do something that was outdated 5 years prior. PLUS, my pocket pc does not have independent 3d hardware, but it can play games that have comparable 3d to the PS1 and it is as old as the GBA so don't feed me the line of crap that no portable at that time could not handle 3d because you are wrong my friend.

As for the DS hardware, ok my wording wasn't the best, so i'll reword it. The DS is comparable to N64 hardware, which is old. So far i haven't seen anything graphically and power wise that the N64 could not handle.

I won't even comment about Magus.

i'm not going to get into a fanboy war since only a fanboy would get so infuriated over some comments to post the stuff that you have. You took a good civil conversation and blew it completely out of proportion.

 

[Ravnos]

Pocket PCs also typically cost 2-3x what the GBA did, even on its original release. Nintendo also didn't go overboard with the GBA's capabilities because they were concerned about battery life.

 

[PokeParadox]

I don't see what the fuss is... Portable consoles have always been at least one generation behind in terms of hardware. It's just what has to be done to actually make batteries last.

Think back to the Game Gear... it had a nice enough display... but it took 6AAs and ate them in about an hour...

 

[Angel]

it just seems to me they are going a step back with the revolution, not forward, but that seems typical with their recent endevours.

I do understand the GBA and the cost factor and everything, but the point i was trying to make is that the potential was there, just not grasped. It turned out to work well for Nintendo, but the GBA had the potential to be alot more than what it was.

 

[Rico]

It's a good idea. The Xbox360 is multi-core, and the PS3 has Cell which is even more complicated. You know how PSX/PS2 games got increasingly better looking over time, as developers got used to the architecture? This will be increased tenfold with an entirely new system of computing - parallel computing. It's incredibly hard to get right. Yet, Gamecube developers will move over onto the Revolution extremely easily, with the benefit of extra power to make games look good right off the bat.

Yes it's annoying that the graphics aren't really good but as PC gamer who is solely interested in the Rev for its controller, I don't mind. And nor will most casual users OR people buying it with an X360 or PS3, I expect.

 

[itsme]

But its' NEXT GENERATION, i want to play NEXT GENERATION GAMES, not the last generation but with a gimmick controller. If i want to play XBOX games, i'll buy games for my XBOX, which it seems that on paper, the Rev is only slightly more powerful than an XBOX.

You've been reading press releases from MS and Sony religiously, I guess. B)

What is the definition of the next generation? CPUxX + GPUxX + RAMxX = next generation is MS and Sony's definition of next generation, as we all know. Surely, that's A way to bring next generation, and it's been that way in the past, but not necessarily HAS to be that way, either.

Sony and MS's main market is teen to early 30s tech savy male who read every rumor about what the next graphics chipset will be and when the next video iPod will be announced like YOU and US.

Nintendo is basically saying that "ok guys, go ahead and take that market, and I'll go find somewhere else for my market." That is a huge risk taking and I don't know if I have a gut to take that risk myself, since video gaming has been meaning teen to early 30s guys.

I'm sure there are many more people like my wife who have no idea what CPU is and 3.2Ghz CPU clock speed sounds as good as 2.4Ghz cordless phones. To them, what looks good on their eyes looks good. Usually, they don't own 2k dollar big screen TV that supports HD resolutions, they'd rather go on family vacation with that kind of money if they have that kind of spare money to begin with.

I'm also sure that in SDTV resolution, even we, the tech savy people, will be hard-pressed to see the difference between a revolution game and a ps3 game for a while; do you remember Evergrace for PS2?

Of course, I have no idea if Nintendo will succeed or not, and if anyone pretends to know that, they're lying or dreaming at this point. Nonetheless, it's interesting to see one to run to the exact opposite direction of the others running to; high cost console with high price games vs low cost console with low price games. Time will tell if Ninty was utterly brilliant or gravely stupid.

 

[Angel]

when i say next generation games, i mean this. and i've been playing games since the 2600

Atari 2600 to 5200 to 7800 to the Jaguar. each generation had some pretty major visual advances and technological advances.

Nintendo NES to SNES to N64 to Gamecube, each generation had some pretty major visual and technological advances

Sega Master System to Mega Drive to Saturn to Dreamcast, each generation had some pretty major visual and technological advances

Sony Playstation to Sony playstation II, the advancement in generations was pretty dramatic.

When i think next generation, i think of advances in technology both visually and gamewise. ON PAPER AND ACCORDING TO THE ARTICLE your seeing something and its being compared to an XBOX, not something that is next generation. And i think in all fairness, the Rev needs to be compared to the PS3 and 360 since it will be competing against the 2. Still, the Rev is pretty hush hush, and nobody will know what will happen until its released, it just doesn't impress me on paper, and according to that article

I will probably pick up a 360 within the next year or so, i think its a pretty decent balance between price and power.