Nintendo Revolution NOT to support HD gaming.

[PawnTakesKing]

I'm sorry if this has already been posted. I searched the forums and couldn't find another topic on it. Anyway, here it is, straight from IGN:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/624/624200p1.html

Personally, I think this was a bad move. I'm glad it will make the Revolution even more affordable, but I don't see how Nintendo could deny that HD is important.

[YoshiFan1]

Personally, it doesn't affect me because I don't have a HDTV and probably won't get one for a while but I definetly see why it's a bad decision. Nintendo really needs to step it up next generation to compete and doing things like this won't help them. Someone who has a HDTV is definetly want their console to support it and I think this could hurt Nintendo a little.

[Mattte]

Do that many people really have HDTVs? I know only one person out of the many I know that has one (Isn't even used for gaming).

I could care less, as long as it makes my console and online cost less.

[PawnTakesKing]

Personally, it doesn't affect me because I don't have a HDTV and probably won't get one for a while but I definetly see why it's a bad decision. Nintendo really needs to step it up next generation to compete and doing things like this won't help them. Someone who has a HDTV is definetly want their console to support it and I think this could hurt Nintendo a little.

Same situation here. I don't have an HDTV, but it would be nice to know that at least when I got one, Revolution would support it.

Unless Nintendo unveils some major revelations soon, I think they may be sunk, as much as I hate to say it. Even as a hardcore Nintendo fan, the thought of playing next-gen games on a glorified Gamecube does not appeal to me much. I'm waiting for the Big N to drop the bomb and explain what the heck makes Revolution so revolutionary.

[manofpeace20]

Doesn't effect me at all either. I figure by the time HDTV becomes mainstream the next wave of consoles will be at the end of their lifespan anyway.

[Samurai X]

That sucks, i really wanted it to be HD , since i have a 60" sony hdtv , i always thought video games couldn't get any better until i got this tv , now i can notice a lot of things can be better on this huge lcd screen, not HD is a big turn off !

[Dr Mario Kart]

It should be fine. If BOTH the PS3 and 360 REQUIRE that their games support various HD resolutions, Nintendo stands out as providing an alternative to the higher dev costs of their competitors. For smaller companies like NIS, who like to use low-res hand drawn 2d sprites, and like to get their games out quick and keep costs low.

[guyver2077]

fucking nintendo never fail to suprise me...
its always in a bad way....

[sblymnlcrymnl]

This (http://www.penny-arcade.com/hookup_18.php3) is the first thing that came to mind ...

[Rig]

Although I wish their console was HD supported, it really doesn't affect me. I won't be getting an HDTV until I am out of college...

[zzl365]

I think MS is going overboard by requiring HD (which means all games will cost more to make), and Nintendo is going overboard by not allowing developers to utilize HD. I kind of understand MS's decision, but Nintendo's decision makes no sense to me. Why prohibit developers who WANT to make games that can be played in an HD output from doing so?

[coolsteel]

I have an HDTV so this comes as a huge WTF, I just don't get Nintendo at all . Standard stuff here, I mean there is a reason Microsoft and Sony are including support, because people would use it, nintendo just doesn't seem to get that.

[suko_32]

I don't really know many ppl with HDTV and it also doesn't affect me so I don't really care. I won't be getting that good of a TV for at least 4 years...unless it becomes a norm by then.

[greyzieoriental]

maybe they are doing this becuz only 5% or whatever they made up only use their expensive component cables that can only be ordered off their website which is currently backordered to june and still on backorder almost 1/2 way through the fucking month

damn nintendo better change their mind in the next yr, sux to be a nintendo fan with an hdtv
well at least this years zelda TP will support 480p right?

[rodeojones903]

Well, I wont be buying a revolution now. Grey I read somewhere that Zelda TP will not support pro scan or widescreen.

[Dr Mario Kart]

it seems this is quite the polarizing thing.

zomg! Nintendo is teh d00m3d.

It'll turn off some developers, it'll attract others. In the end, money will be made. I dont mind that Nintendo is telling the visual whores to go elsewhere.

[Dr Mario Kart]

In 2006, or when 85 percent of the nation is receiving DTV signals, each broadcaster must return to the FCC a channel used for analog broadcasting. The returned channels then would be put up for auction to wireless service providers and other private parties to help pay down the nation's debt.

The lack of digital-capable television sets has been a major impediment to Congress' tentative deadline of December 2006 to complete the transition from traditional analog TV signals to digital. The 1997 law setting that deadline permits it to be extended in any market until 85 percent of the homes have a digital TV.

Current law requires television broadcasters to give up their old analog airwaves by the end of 2006, or when 85 percent of the country can see the new, higher quality signals, whichever comes later.

The law permits the deadline to be extended in the event that 85% of the public isn't getting HDTV. All your TVs arent suddenly just going to drop dead in 2007. Furthermore, I dont think the MASSIVE increase in HDTV users that would be needed by 2007 for this to take place, will materialize.

Here's one for you that sets the record straight. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?threadid=533951) They can extend it, but they are under a lot of pressure not to.

I thought they were going to offer 480p support? So calm down already.

[zionoverfire]

I think it's a very calculated move, for the moment it should help them keep game development costs down and limit the hardware required to play game. The question really comes how many people will have HD tvs when the consul half-life arrives.

[David85]

One generation behind with online.
DVD player wasn't needed.
Mini DVDs instead of regular.

Is is just me or the REV the system that should have came out this gen?

Yet another nail in the coffin, nice job Nintendo, keep living in the past.

[TheBlueWizard]

I agree with some of the comments.

Nintendo made it perfectly clear at E3 that they don't care what the competition is doing. I think that not supporting HD is a brilliant move on their part. The world isn't going HD for a long time. I know that the law says by 2006, but lets face it, that is NOT going to happen. When you consider the life of a system (3-5 years), they could bring HD for the one after Revolution and look brilliant for not spending the money for this generation as they hit HD about the time that TV actually CHANGES to HD.

If you want HD gaming, get a 360. It'll cost more and so will games. If you can afford the HDTV, you can afford to pay extra for the games. Nintendo just doesn't care what the others are going to do. They never have and they never will.

Having read some of the interviews with Nintendo and Miyamoto in recent weeks, I honestly think that they don't care what Sony and MS are going to do.

As for what is revolutionary about the Revolution? My take? Its not really a console at all, but a USB device that will play on your PS3 or 360.

TBW

[javeryh]

This SUCKS. I am a big Nintendo supporter but this is just another reason to go out and pick up a PS3 or 360. Before the console's life is up, HDTV is going to become VERY common and Nintendo will be left behind yet again. It's not like they have to REQUIRE HD for all the games but at least make it an option. Guess where I'll be playing most of my multiplatform games....

[argyle]

I agree with some of the comments.

Nintendo made it perfectly clear at E3 that they don't care what the competition is doing. I think that not supporting HD is a brilliant move on their part. The world isn't going HD for a long time. I know that the law says by 2006, but lets face it, that is NOT going to happen. When you consider the life of a system (3-5 years), they could bring HD for the one after Revolution and look brilliant for not spending the money for this generation as they hit HD about the time that TV actually CHANGES to HD.

If you want HD gaming, get a 360. It'll cost more and so will games. If you can afford the HDTV, you can afford to pay extra for the games. Nintendo just doesn't care what the others are going to do. They never have and they never will.

Having read some of the interviews with Nintendo and Miyamoto in recent weeks, I honestly think that they don't care what Sony and MS are going to do.

As for what is revolutionary about the Revolution? My take? Its not really a console at all, but a USB device that will play on your PS3 or 360.

TBW


Spoken like someone who doesn't own a HD set. :| My opinion? You'll see HD go mainstream a lot sooner than that. HD DVDs are about to hit, whether they be blue-ray or another format. The industry knows that HD DVDs won't sell to people who don't have HD sets, so that means you're going to see the prices of those sets start dropping. Anyone who buys a new TV today and doesn't get a HD set is out of their mind anyway.

And what's with the "If you want HD gaming, get a 360."? That's the dumbest logic I've heard all day (granted, the day is young...). What if I want to play Nintendo games in HD? Or was there some announcement I missed about Nintendo making games for the 360 now?

Fact is, this won't stop me from getting the Revolution, but it definitely doesn't make me happy. And yes, as someone else said it's another example of Nintendo being behind the curve.

[javeryh]

If you can afford the HDTV, you can afford to pay extra for the games.

Having money doesn't mean I'm prone to wasting it. If this is the general perception then it's no wonder why most people don't have an HDTV. Just because you have money doesn't mean you have to spend it like crazy.

[rockhero]

That really sucks. There's no way for this to be interpreted as a good thing even for the most rabid Nintendo fan.. I'll still probably get a Revolution, but for anyone who has played on a nice HD set you'll know what a bad move this is..

[Purkeynator]

I just don't get Nintendo anymore. I think they just all lost it. First they had people all excited about downloading all the older games free, then they take it away and say it will cost more money. Then they take away any possibility of HD gaming and again piss people off. Its like they want to fail. I used to be the biggest Nintendo fan but every year they pull a new boner. First it was Virtual Boy. Then it was a color gameboy without a backlit screen. Then we had blurry graphics and expensive cartridges on N64 instead of cd-roms. Then we had a gameboy advance with no backlight. Then we had a purple system with a handle and small a$$ discs that hold a fraction of what dvds can hold with no dvd play back. Then we have the DS which can play gameboy advance games (one player only no link up) but no gameboy and gameboy color games. Now this crap about the Revolution. (Don't even get me started on the lack of 3rd party games over the past few years) I am done with Nintendo. I kinda figured they would screw up again. I have bought every system since the NES and have been less and less impressed with each one (except SNES and GBA SP). I think I won't be buying a Revolution next year. I have enough Mario games anyway.

[TheBlueWizard]

Fact is, this won't stop me from getting the Revolution, but it definitely doesn't make me happy. And yes, as someone else said it's another example of Nintendo being behind the curve.

Exactly. No HD will not stop you from buying one.

It won't stop me either.

It won't stop many of the others out there either, since we are all fans of those games that you will never be able to get elsewhere. Can you say Zelda?

That being the case, why bother with it (supporting or requiring HD)? They know that we will still jump on board and buy one. Parents with kids will do it too. Why? Becuase Nintendo makes kids games and they will be cheaper than other next gen consoles.

If they can decide that having or not having HD support won't affect sales (within a few percent), why bother with the cost of requiring it? They think that they can do what they need to do without it. Who are we to argue? We're consumers, who will probably still buy their consoles and games. It looks like they still win if we do.

One the HD front...

The HD war is going to be a long one. I am willing to bet that we will be well past the next generation of consoles before its here to stay. So is Nintendo. Are they right? We'll, I guess we will find out in 4-5 years. If their next console (past Revolution) is HD and right on time, they are going to look bloody brilliant.

The Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD war is going to be a long ugly one too. There are way too many people out there who like the $40 DVD player at Wal-mart and the $5 movie bin. It will take the new formats years to compete with those as the new formats are going to be expensive for the next couple of years. And unless those new machines play DVD's, it will be an even longer road.

Remember, for the success of any of the HD formats, it will take mainstream acceptance...and that will take time. HD has been "coming" since 1997 and I still don't know anyone who has an HDTV.

TBW

[TheBlueWizard]

Having money doesn't mean I'm prone to wasting it. If this is the general perception then it's no wonder why most people don't have an HDTV. Just because you have money doesn't mean you have to spend it like crazy.

I could easily afford to walk out today and get a 42" plasma with HD. I just don't see the need to. I think that a lot of people think that way too. Until people can't watch Seinfeld reruns without HD, HD is not going to be generally accepted.

TBW

[David85]

Will this stop the Nintendo fanboys from buying the system? No, but the point is to create a new crowd. Nintendo can no longer live on their crowd because it shrinks more and more as the years go on. But they don't care, they still think they are numbe rone, they aren't they are in last. Like some people said, it's not like Nintendo has to make people make HD games, just have the opinion. Of course this can all change in a year considering Nintendo has proven over and over again that they don't have anything really done with the REV.

[ryanbph]

I understand their position, but while hdtv might not be the dominating tv in consumers homes, it will be in the upcoming years....if the revolution is to have a 5 year life cycle, and is releases next year...then by the end of its life cycle, it will be 2011....IMO, in 2011, the amount of hdtv owners will be a lot higher

[argyle]

Exactly. No HD will not stop you from buying one.

It won't stop me either.

It won't stop many of the others out there either, since we are all fans of those games that you will never be able to get elsewhere. Can you say Zelda?

That being the case, why bother with it (supporting or requiring HD)? They know that we will still jump on board and buy one. Parents with kids will do it too. Why? Becuase Nintendo makes kids games and they will be cheaper than other next gen consoles.


So you're advocating companies doing the bare minimum to keep their current fanbase? Why, as a consumer, would you possibly be in favor of that?

And just because you don't know anyone who has a HD TV doesn't mean they aren't starting to become more widespread. You are NOT the center of the universe (afaik...).

[opportunity777]

When the top two console makers are going HD and you are not then you just screwed up. I know Nintendo doesn't want to do what others are doing, but that's the name of the game. You need to imitate the features of your competitors AND add unique features to your own system if you are going to be competitive in the marketplace. There's nothing brilliant about this move at all, they just felt they should take a stand on certain technical aspects of the system to make it stand out, but instead it makes it inferior.

[adamsappel]

As for what is revolutionary about the Revolution? My take? Its not really a console at all, but a USB device that will play on your PS3 or 360.

So, you think that Nintendo is going to make a product that requires you to additionally buy a Sony or Microsoft console? You're lambasting Nintendo for cheaping out on HD, yet they'll being asking you to shell out at least another $300 to play their games? Heh.

I hope Revolution will at least support 480p, but not having true HD isn't a deal breaker for me. I have an HDTV, but it uses 1080i. I'm not sure if 360 or PS3 will use 720p and/or 1080i. Requiring HD isn't going to result in every game being a work of art, you know. Some TV shows in HD look almost worse, since you can see how "fake" everything is. Developers are going to have to go an extra mile to get their games looking good, and there's many an Xbox title that still looks like crap, despite being in 480p.

And why do people keep stating with such authority that the game market for Nintendo is shrinking? Wait until you have kids and you're debating whether to play Halo or Ghost Recon with your six-year-old and you'll realize that Nintendo has an entire market all to themselves, and thank goodness for it.

[kill3r7]

I don't really care either way. Nintendo has always been about inventive gaming and that's going to be the reason I'll probably buy the Revolution. Otherwise, I'm taking the wait and see approach.

[skinsfan56la]

Good ole reliable Nintendo. The never surprise me with their stupid decisions.

[dschroll]

Well, there is some good news to this. For instance, there's a high probability that the Revo will support 480p and games running in 16:9. Not to mention, I would expect all games to run at 60 fps.

I would much rather play a 480p game running at a solid 60 fps rather than an HD game running at possible unsteady frame rates.

[Aleryn]

Nintendo ignoring yet another new, exciting format that'll prolly become standard. And will regret it later, just like they have since 1996 with their catridge over CD choice for the First-Of-Bad-Omens-64.

I'll buy it any way, 1st party Nintendo games are priceless.

[MadMrBacon]

Everyone seems to mentioning these upcoming high def DVD format wars in their posts on this thread. The war has been over for a while: http://dvd.ign.com/articles/606/606542p1.html

[dschroll]

Everyone seems to mentioning these upcoming high def DVD format wars in their posts on this thread. The war has been over for a while: http://dvd.ign.com/articles/606/606542p1.html

Actually, the war is far from over. That is an old article. See the most recent news:

http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9450

[b3b0p]

I could not care less.

I have HDTV (multiple) and just don't care.

I play my games for fun and entertainment. Higher resolutions and/or better graphics/colors/etc... does not change the fun factor associated with the game.

Who ever said HD was law by 2006, your wrong.

It is Digital by a certain date (that keeps changing), not HD. There is a difference. HD is high resolution. While Digital can be the same old low resolution you get now, but just over different spectrum. Think DirecTV and Digital Cable. All DirecTV channels are Digital, but only a select few are in HD.

[swetooth9]

yay! i dont have an hdtv and since it won't support it, it might be a little cheaper :D

[rodeojones903]

I wonder if this will effect their 3rd party support.

[zionoverfire]

I understand their position, but while hdtv might not be the dominating tv in consumers homes, it will be in the upcoming years....if the revolution is to have a 5 year life cycle, and is releases next year...then by the end of its life cycle, it will be 2011....IMO, in 2011, the amount of hdtv owners will be a lot higher

That's not really important since system domination will be decided long before then, the question is how many people will buy a system based on HD in 2008? I would say if they don't own an HD TV or want to save $100 the revolution will probably be a smart choice. That is of course assuming they don't make another N64 or GC.

[Chris in Cali]

I have no plans on going HD until 2010 so I couldn't care less, bring on the cheaper console!

[dpatel]

not smart at all.

I'm sure it won't be a big deal at first but later on in its life, it will be a huge deal. HDTV will be mainstream quicker than you think. The next-gen consoles aren't even out yet and the HDTV prices are pretty reasonable. Once blu-ray hits, prices will drop even more. I really don't think they could go 4+ years without supporting HD. I really hope Rev has some good news or I won't be getting one. HD isn't really THAT important, nice but not necessary, but they have to prove to me why their console is revolutionary.

[dschroll]

not smart at all.

HD isn't really THAT important, nice but not necessary, but they have to prove to me why their console is revolutionary.

I think they have to prove that to us all. I must confess, I was very skeptical when they announced the DS. Now I am a believer as it does indeed provide fun and unique games. I am hoping for a similar suprise from the Revolution.

[oleander]

This generation, it seems that it has become increasingly common to own more than one system. That said, what about next generation? Are all of you really excited about the prospect of owning two (very similar) systems if it costs $700? I know I'm not. And yes, I know they have their differences, but honestly, are they significant enough to warrant having both?
Then there is Nintendo, which promises a different experience at a much lower cost. So you've already got your HD system - what if your second console was actually something different? And what if going for that saved you as much as $200? Not to mention all of the games that you know will be great HD or not (Zelda, Metroid, SSB, etc.). And what about all of the downloads?
In addition, third party games should cost less to make for Revolution (they don't have to worry so much about optimization). So what if they made them cheaper? If a game was $10-$20 less on revolution, that would certainly be some incentive to get the revolution version. Surely you will want the HD versions of your favorite games, but what about games that you are less interested in (or games in which the graphics just don't matter or are not as good). Will it really be worth more money just to get the HD versions?
A lot still remains to be seen, and I think that quite a bit rides on their "revolutionary" features (more than I originally thought, anyway). But Nintendo could make itself a good 2nd console, and that is, IMO, a perfectly good place to be. After all, if half of the people who bought a console bought an X360, and the other half bought a PS3, but everyone chose the revolution as their 2nd console - it would turn out pretty well for nintendo. (and yes, I realize that this is an exaggeration/simplification, but you get the point)

[dschroll]

oleander,

Great post. I totally agree. Well said.

[MadMrBacon]

Actually, the war is far from over. That is an old article. See the most recent news:

http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=9450

Thanks for correcting me. I'm kind of disappointed now. I buy quite a few DVDs and this won't do the industry any good. Sorry for being so adamant about the point, I thought the deal had been finalized.

Oleander: I agree completely with you. The real decision to be made is whether you want your Revolution with a side of PS3 or a side of 360.

[mookiemeister]

How much does it add to the cost per console with suppose for HD? Even though I don't have HDTV and probably won't get it anytime soon, it's nice to have a console that suppose HD so I have the option to get better video when/if I upgrade to HDTV.

[jkam]

Why is everyone so crazy about this? I can appreciate an HDTV just as much as the next person but come on. If people actually took a step back they would realize that Microsoft and Sony are more than anything trying to sell you the next big format as well as higher price equipment.....so you have to go and rebuy everything you already own because this is so much better. I don't have a Movie Theater in my house but that doesn't mean I wouldn't watch a movie at home on a DVD player or a VCR for that matter. If everyone is that concerned about the picture quality they can't be enjoying their games very much.

[evilmax17]

Don't have an HDTV, no immediate plans to get one, so it doesn't affect me.

[David85]

I wonder if this will effect their 3rd party support.


That is the number one issue.

3rd party already think Nintendo is always one step behind, because they are, and how will this look to the 3rd party developers.

Plus we have to remember the people here are fanboys so yet again the general gaming crowd heres this and will go "My PS3 kicks the GayCube 3 to bits, the Gaycube 2 doesn't even support HD". Sure the peopel is a dumbass, but the majority of common gamers are and their word of mouth spreads.

[PawnTakesKing]

I think oleander summed it up quite nicely. Still, I'm planning on buying a new HDTV before I get married next April, so it's kind of disappointing that my Revolution games won't look as nice and shiny as my XBox 360 games will.

On the other hand, the price difference between the Rev and the 360 will probably be phenomenal. If the 360 launches at $360, as predicted, I can see the Revolution launching around $199. Hopefully, no high-def support means that most Nintendo games will keep a price point of $40 or $50, while 360 titles will go for $50 and $60. Then you'll have to take into account the composite cables you'll need to buy if you want 720/1080 support on the 360 (unless the system comes with them, which I doubt). Overall, the cost of owning a Revolution could be up to $300 cheaper than an Xbox 360. And I can't imagine how much the PS3 will cost, but I'm noy buying one anyway so I'm not very concerned about it.

Again, like oleander said, 360 for the pretty games, Revolution for the innovation/nostalgia factor.

[Reality's Fringe]

Oh no! Teh Graf-X will suxor?

I game on a tv I bought from Wal-mart for about $270 and my games are still crisp and pretty with the standard Red White Yellow configuration. At this rate, I think I might get to S-Video by 2008 and HD by 2014, so it is of no consequence to me. I can see how this would be a minor problem for others though.

[CapAmerica]

I find this somewhat weird. Nintendo has stated that the Revolution will have a VGA out feature yet they are not suporting HD. It just seems very weird.

While I don't see this really as a Bad move it is a weird one.

I personally don't see HDTV takeing over 50% of the market for at least another 5 years and by then we'll be moving on to another console. HDTV won't be taking off till 1. you can pick one up for $100 at Wal-Mart and 2. There is a REAL good reason for every buddy out there to own one. And I mean a REAL good reason. Not just the fact that you get a better picture.

HD suport I don't think is going to be a real selling feature till Next Next Gen. Right now its going to be gimicky again like HD suport was this Gen. Why should Nintendo waste the money to add suport to something that only like 8% of the market is going to use. (Note: I don't know what the curent % of HDTV Owners is, Last I knew it was around 8%)

If Nintendo truelly doesn't suport HD next Gen I really don't see it hurting them at all. I don't see them loseing any 3rd party suport or sales. People who really care about the games are still going to buy it.

And really if you deside not to buy a Revolution because it doesn't have HD suport that is a very sad, lame and pathetic reason. Which also makes me think you were Never going to buy it in the first place. And if thats how your going to act I don't want you buying one anyway. So quit your bitchen.

[jam3582]

well I hope it means they will atleast support 480p (considering thats not Hi-def) . I wish they would have support it cause atleast when I play my cube games with progressive scan on easily makes the game more enjoyable .

why well because its clearer , nothing is blurry its like when you put on a pair of glasses for the first time the world becomes clearer. But alas thats ok that they dont . It wont make me stop from buyin it ofcourse but as long as they support progressive scan ill be happy .

on a side not im curious as to how much money does it actually cost a developer to add Hi-def support .

[Demolition Man]

Nintendo should at least support 480p on the Revolution. I'd be more than happy to see every game support that. :D

[crazytalkx]

I'm using the RWYs on a 6 year old GE 27 inch. This doesn't affect me at all!!

[GreenMonkey]

Nintendo, unlike everyone else's consoles, had me sold for one at launch. Now, I question whether I will. If the Revolution doesn't support at least 480p over component I'm not buying. It's indicative of Nintendo's thinking. I'm not hooking up my damn Revolution with a standard s-video cable, it's 2005 for fuck ing sake. Just wait, probably no digital 5.1 either, probably DPLII again. Fuck that.

It's annoying enough they yanked the progressive support from the cube...our cube is dying and I will have to track down a used one, in person, so that I can verify it has the port.

For you people going on like those of us with HD are rich...a very good Sanyo 30" WS or 32" 4:3 HDTV is available @ Walmart for less than $698. Most 42"-60" CRT RPTVs are between $1k and $1500 these days.

My 800x600 (480p in widescreen mode) Infocus X1 projector cost me $999 2 years ago, and now can be found on the used/refurb market for like $500. I need at least 480p.

HD is gaining market penetration quite quickly as prices drop. This is a moron move on Nintendo's part.

And as far as "saving money on development"... Bullshit. It doesn't take that much programming to throw in a couple more resolutions. The real issue is having hardware that can handle 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Apparently Nintendo will skimp on the video card/cpu power - this is why the aren't supporting it. To be cheaper.

[Mistik]

So this may sound stupid but...going back to the switchover to Hi-Def channels. You'll still be able to watch it on non hi-def TVs won't you? I figured you just wouldn't get as good a picture but I'm not really sure about this. Can anybody clarify?

[FoeHammer]

Once you really get to play some stuff on a HD set its truly is hard to go back. BUT the xbox 360 will come with a vga cable, Iv read, so you will be able to hook it up on your computer monitor for full HD capabilities. I got one of those vga HD adpaters for xbox and Iv noticed such a enhancement that I lug my huge monitor every where I want to play. But the advantage it gives is truly something. You can see farther and the colors are much better. I would take a small 17" computer monitor w/vga HD adapter over a 30" rca cable tv anyday of the week and in multiplayer the true advantage would shine through. You could pick up a badass flatscreen monitor for MUCH less than a HDTV. Just get some time on a system with some HD and youll see what all the fuss is about.

[GreenMonkey]

So this may sound stupid but...going back to the switchover to Hi-Def channels. You'll still be able to watch it on non hi-def TVs won't you? I figured you just wouldn't get as good a picture but I'm not really sure about this. Can anybody clarify?

Yes, most HD boxes can downscale and chuck out a standard 480i signal via svideo or composite cables. Before I had my projector in house I got an HD OTA tuner. I ran it out to my 27" TV. Talk about a pretty SD picture. Perfect reception over the air, better than DVD :D

[Masterkyo]

I don't care cuz i'll pickup NR anway. Beside i have 60" HDTV and never use it to play. :)

[Friend of Sonic]

Will this stop the Nintendo fanboys from buying the system? No, but the point is to create a new crowd. Nintendo can no longer live on their crowd because it shrinks more and more as the years go on. But they don't care, they still think they are numbe rone, they aren't they are in last. Like some people said, it's not like Nintendo has to make people make HD games, just have the opinion. Of course this can all change in a year considering Nintendo has proven over and over again that they don't have anything really done with the REV.
I don't think Nintendo is in trouble. True, they're in last place. But they're a very profitable and successful last place. They've of course pulled incredible sales with the GBA, the DS isn't doing too shabby, and they've almost always had a profit on the Gamecube. In fact, if I remember correctly, until 2004, they had gone 60 some years being in the green. Nintendo is here for keeps, at least for the time being. They're a multi billion dollar with plenty of dough in the bank to compete. That is, compete on their own terms, not against Sony and Microsoft.
And the HD issue? Aw, c'mon, it's like Xbox Live being broadband only. It's great and everything, it's sure better then dialup users slowing down matches, but when you think about it, there just isn't enough people with broadband. Same thing with HD.

[scdoanintendo]

To make a hopeful difference go here and email Nintendo

http://cube.ign.com/articles/625/625423p1.html