[quote name='MorPhiend']I wouldn't be surprised, actually, if that was one of the Revolutionary aspects. Maybe the Revolution is just like developing for the GCN? Companies are barely starting to figure out the tricks this gen and this gen is being abondoned already (something that, iirc, you yourself have complained about) - just look at RE4 and MGS3 for examples. So what would be the problem with a "new" console that, at it's heart, was just a souped up, consolidated, energy efficient, cheaper version of the old core. But then throw in new technology that was developed for just such a purpose (such as GPU) that will make the console comparable to what trhe others are offering. So a simplified way to make games that allows developers to utilize what they already know, is cheap to develop for, is quick to develop for, allows for games and innovation to be used instead of time and money, plus it all looks on par with 360 (maybe better?) - what's so wrong with all of that? I'd be on board for that. Throw in exclusive Nintendo franchises, plus a back catalog of Nintendo's entire history? You have got to be kidding me if you think it's a bad idea.
You don't know that this (or more) isn't the case. And everything that has been said sure suggests something along these lines, so just withhold your judgement until you actually know something.
(Something I do know is that Sony flat out lied with the PS2 unveiling. Why wouldn;t that be the case again? Nintendo underplayed the power of N64 and GCN, why wouldn't it again be the same?)[/QUOTE]
Where Sony lied wasn't in the numbers but in the hyperbole regardign what those number would enable.
A big difference this time around is that the Emotion Engine was kept larely under wraps until the machine was shipping. When Microprocessor Report did the definitve analysis of it they said it was liek pulling teeth try to get objective data out of Sony. With Cell, things are different. IBM is much more open about it and the product is intended to see use in many devices other than the PS3. You can't sell it to the open market without disclosing a lot about the product. Sources I trust have told me the numbers are pretty much what Sony is claiming. The question is channeling the power effectively.
The 360 offers a lot of known quantities as well. If Microsoft claims number that experience PPC developers find questionable the word is going to spread pretty fast. The web loves that sort of gossip.
On the GPU side the there is lots of new secret sauce but we can tell a lot from those vendors' recent products. Even if those video processors are only equivalent to the best of what is in gaming PCs today, that is a huge jump for consoles. There is definitely some new ground being broken here. The unified shader structure in the Xbox 360's VPU, for instance, has long been the stuff of dreams but now it's real. Instead of being stuck with the distribution of pixel shader pipes to vertex shader pipes chosen by the vendor, developers can now configure those on the fly. (The SDK will likely offer a tool to determine which ration best suits a scene.)
If the Revolution is just the GameCube made faster there won't be much learning curve but there won't be much gains over time either. Third year titles won't look much better than launch titles. There will hopefully be some new elements such as dedicated shaders but the physical requirements of the design mean those will be limited, perhaps equivalent to the low end of DX9 class chips. A big improvement over the GameCube but the competition won't even break a sweat while leaving it in the dust.
Thems the choices. If nintendo can hit a $200 price point again and come up with some clever ways to differentiate themselves from the more expensive monsters, there may be a good business. If their sole tactic is to lower cost of entry again, they're in deep doo-doo.