GCN/Revolution E3 Game Announcement Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote name='David85']There is no SpaceWorld, hasn't for years.

Nintendo and MS really should have HD DVD on their systems, but they are being dumb again.[/QUOTE]

MS doesn't need it. If HD-DVD becomes a big thing you can install one in your PC and stream movies over the network. For games the capacity doesn't matter. Just putting a nother disc in the box is too cheap to worry about it. It's fars less disruptive to change discs in a game that takes many hours or even days to complete than in the middle of a movie, which was one of the problems with laserdisc.

MS plans to play the Media Center Extender card for enhancing the 360's value proposition. Nintendo isn't in the movie or media player business. They'll get plenty of mileage from DVD. Both will benefit from it being a very inexpensive and proven mechanism. There is no telling what issues Sony may encounter with Blu-ray and their schedule. If a compromise format comes into existence as the standard for HD content playback it will be far too late for PS3. The Blu-ray drives in the PS3 could become like the Dreamcast's GD-ROM.
 
[quote name='epobirs']So these retro enthusiast are already covered. How does Nintendo convert them to paying cutomers for stuff they already own? It isn't like the GBA revivals where portability was a feature.

Which raises another question. Hard core gamers can name a zillion titles near and dear to their hearts, but how many of the golden oldies that have a good sized potential audience haven't already been resurrected on the PS1, GBA, DS, etc. ? For instance, why buy the NES Classics version of Metroid when Metroid Zero is a far superior version with the original as an unlockable? Assuming they don't make the service overpriced, what will the cheap availability of N64 games do the revival of same of the DS?

If you're a big fan of vintage Nintendo titles, chances are you already bought them on the GBA. Are there going to be enough items left to make the cost of the service acceptable.

Don't get me wrong. I think it's a good idea. I just don't think it's a sufficient reason to buy the Revolution. I'd suggest Sony do the same thing with PS1 games when the new generation of broadband service becomes available, like Verizon's FIOS. At 15 MB speeds you could download a game that filled two-thirds of a CD-ROM quite quickly. But if that happens in the PS3's lifetime it would be a cool thing but not reason in of itself to buy a PS3. It would be like choosing a new car model because it comes with a CD player and cassette deck while the others only have CD players. When you can get a portable cassette player for $20 that feature is hardly a way to pick a car.[/QUOTE]

You misunderstand the situation as I see it. Sure, a couple of the guys (4 outta the 40) had retro gaming systems. Almost al the rest of the guys would see these retro system and become nostalgic "Awesome... Chrono Trigger, I remember this game...". They were conversation starters... not all people who were INTERESTED in them OWNED them. A surprsing amount of girls (perhaps even MORE girls) are interested in these systems (which they do not own...). Nintendo as a BRANd is riding high on retro cool (clothing, patches, and the like). I think if the price is right (somewhere alnog the lines of $4.99 for NES, $14.99 for SNES, and $19.99 for N64) and it is marketed as such... Nintendo may have a feasible idea on their hands. It should be noted that these peopel DON'T own a GBA... they like playing these games as they would play Halo 2, or GTA... on the big screen.

This would also make an amazing budget choice for families... I understand that it may not automatically appeal to us... but those illegal old school emulators sold like hotcakes... and for the consumer this may just be a souped up version of that.

As I see it... there isnt a lot of direct to DS N64 ports... in fact I was expecting MORE of them than have shown their face. I don;t think that this feature would kill to much of the NDS's momentum.
 
well, no matter what, after seeing and owning the DS, I have newfound faith in Nintendo for sake of originality, and that's from someone who hasn't owned a home console system from Nintendo since the Super Nintendo. I am totally on board for the revolution, just as long as they keep their originality up to par. one thing I think most people have looked over is this


Freedom of design: A dynamic development architecture equally accommodates both big-budget, high-profile game "masterpieces" as well as indie games conceived by individual developers equipped with only a big idea.


at the moment I am working on developing a game, complete with engine and all, and this will atract a huger crowd of developers thus pulling in more games.
 
[quote name='pumbaa']I think if the price is right (somewhere alnog the lines of $4.99 for NES, $14.99 for SNES, and $19.99 for N64) and it is marketed as such... Nintendo may have a feasible idea on their hands. [/QUOTE]

Yikes. I have a hard time paying $20 for a current gen game. There's NO WAY IN HELL I'd pay more than $3 for ANY N64, SNES or NES game that I've already played and even less of a chance of paying that much if it's a game I never played... and that's on the high end. I still have the other systems and if I wanted to play that bad I'd just do so on there...
 
retro gaming isn't going to hook the common masses. Hard core retro gamers already have a hundred GB of roms or their old systems, they arnt going to buy another system and pay a fee to play what that already can for free.

The common generic consumer is not going to save them unless they seriously push newer, fun and well made games.
 
[quote name='pumbaa']You misunderstand the situation as I see it. Sure, a couple of the guys (4 outta the 40) had retro gaming systems. Almost al the rest of the guys would see these retro system and become nostalgic "Awesome... Chrono Trigger, I remember this game...". They were conversation starters... not all people who were INTERESTED in them OWNED them. A surprsing amount of girls (perhaps even MORE girls) are interested in these systems (which they do not own...). Nintendo as a BRANd is riding high on retro cool (clothing, patches, and the like). I think if the price is right (somewhere alnog the lines of $4.99 for NES, $14.99 for SNES, and $19.99 for N64) and it is marketed as such... Nintendo may have a feasible idea on their hands. It should be noted that these peopel DON'T own a GBA... they like playing these games as they would play Halo 2, or GTA... on the big screen.

This would also make an amazing budget choice for families... I understand that it may not automatically appeal to us... but those illegal old school emulators sold like hotcakes... and for the consumer this may just be a souped up version of that.

As I see it... there isnt a lot of direct to DS N64 ports... in fact I was expecting MORE of them than have shown their face. I don;t think that this feature would kill to much of the NDS's momentum.[/QUOTE]

$20 for an N64 game over the wire? NFW. The last time I paid that much for an N64 game it was still Nintendo's lead console. You can get the real thing, machine and all for not much more than that. Heck, I can get a shrinkwrapped copy of Perfect Dark at my local TRU for 98 cents plus tax.

$10 a month for an all-I-can-eat subscription is the most I would even consider. I might even sell of some of my several hundred SNES and N64 games under that circumstance to get some room back. At that price Nintendo should still make an excellent margin on each user. (I'd have a cap on how much a user could transfer in a given time period so insane people drive up the bandwidth bill. Most users would never know about it.) They need to price it low so that it doesn't make users need to justify not canceling every time they get their credit card invoice. Of course, if they really wanted to make people happy they'd be gracious enough to not bill in months of no activity or at least reduce the fee. This is like the bubble gum near the cash register at a grocery store. If the price is painless and the service accommodating the customer just goes along with their whim and that gum adds up to serious money over time.
 
revolution.jpg

looks kinda plain.
 
[quote name='2poor']
looks kinda plain.[/QUOTE]

Fine by me. It'll stack well, unlike the 360 or PS3 because of its shape, and can easily find its way into most entertainment centers with game boxes stacked on top for those people with space issues.
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']well, no matter what, after seeing and owning the DS, I have newfound faith in Nintendo for sake of originality, and that's from someone who hasn't owned a home console system from Nintendo since the Super Nintendo. I am totally on board for the revolution, just as long as they keep their originality up to par. one thing I think most people have looked over is this


Freedom of design: A dynamic development architecture equally accommodates both big-budget, high-profile game "masterpieces" as well as indie games conceived by individual developers equipped with only a big idea.


at the moment I am working on developing a game, complete with engine and all, and this will atract a huger crowd of developers thus pulling in more games.[/QUOTE]

That's been one of my points all along.


And as for the retro games, I doubt that Nintendo (given that they have tried for so long to find a way around extra online costs for the consumer) would go for a subscription service. I'd say that it's more likely that you can buy sets of multiple games for a price, or at the very least it will be like iTunes, $.99 a pop.

I know that I'd go for that. Everything from NES to N64 would be more than worth that (way moreso than a measley song)! And if they had an online function to all of these games, you would be crazy not to buy this thing (and that's not even getting to the GCN functionality and it being foremost a next-gen machine!
 
[quote name='pumbaa']I think if the price is right (somewhere alnog the lines of $4.99 for NES, $14.99 for SNES, and $19.99 for N64) and it is marketed as such... Nintendo may have a feasible idea on their hands.[/QUOTE]

Hah hah, dude that is insane! INSANE!

Most people won't pay more than $5 for most N64 carts nowadays. What makes you think they'll pay $20 for an N64 ROM?
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']That's been one of my points all along.


And as for the retro games, I doubt that Nintendo (given that they have tried for so long to find a way around extra online costs for the consumer) would go for a subscription service. I'd say that it's more likely that you can buy sets of multiple games for a price, or at the very least it will be like iTunes, $.99 a pop.

I know that I'd go for that. Everything from NES to N64 would be more than worth that (way moreso than a measley song)! And if they had an online function to all of these games, you would be crazy not to buy this thing (and that's not even getting to the GCN functionality and it being foremost a next-gen machine![/QUOTE]

why wouldnt they charge I mean they need to make money somehow correct just to supplement the ability to download these retro games from live servers that need to be mantained and serviced 24/7 . selling all those pokemons and zeldas wont compensate for maintaning those servers up . Its very understandable if they wanna charge for that .
 
[quote name='epobirs']$20 for an N64 game over the wire? NFW. The last time I paid that much for an N64 game it was still Nintendo's lead console. You can get the real thing, machine and all for not much more than that. Heck, I can get a shrinkwrapped copy of Perfect Dark at my local TRU for 98 cents plus tax.

$10 a month for an all-I-can-eat subscription is the most I would even consider. I might even sell of some of my several hundred SNES and N64 games under that circumstance to get some room back. At that price Nintendo should still make an excellent margin on each user. (I'd have a cap on how much a user could transfer in a given time period so insane people drive up the bandwidth bill. Most users would never know about it.) They need to price it low so that it doesn't make users need to justify not canceling every time they get their credit card invoice. Of course, if they really wanted to make people happy they'd be gracious enough to not bill in months of no activity or at least reduce the fee. This is like the bubble gum near the cash register at a grocery store. If the price is painless and the service accommodating the customer just goes along with their whim and that gum adds up to serious money over time.[/QUOTE]

It'll be interesting so see exactly how it pans out. 99 cents a game? Thats sounds pretty cool... An Xbox Live-like subscription service... thats sound okay by me as well. This is a pretty intersting approach to both online profitablity and "microtransactions"... and if anyone has the IP and the library to do it... it's Nintendo. The next coming weeks and months are going to be very interesting indeed.
 
I say a subscription service would be best. It would be cheaper for us in the long run, too.

There could be different tiers of the service and each one would cost a bit more but would let you download more games a month.

All Nintendo has ever said is that their online play would be free of subscriptions. They've never said they wouldn't do subscriptions for downloadable content.
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']I say a subscription service would be best. It would be cheaper for us in the long run, too.

There could be different tiers of the service and each one would cost a bit more but would let you download more games a month.

All Nintendo has ever said is that their online play would be free of subscriptions. They've never said they wouldn't do subscriptions for downloadable content.[/QUOTE]
im not paying per game, if we had to i garuntee there would be price variants:

Vigilante 8 - 2.00
Goldeneye - 20.00
 
[quote name='epobirs']I think they'll find the novelty of the idea has worn before the product is even available. Things change when real money enters the picture. Recall how many complained at the price of the NES Classics line? Nintendo made an outrageous margin on those in Japan but they didn't do nearly as much business here. If Nintendo expects comparable margins (minus the media cost) on their virtual library service it's going to mean renewed interest in visiting swap meets for a better deal on the original hardware and software.[/QUOTE]

Well you are talking about the difference between storing that medium on a ROM cart and it sitting on a server ready for download. The storage medium has already been paid for by the consumer. Hopefully Nintendo will charge a nominal fee for game downloads, but we won't know until 2006 so the speculation will just have to continue.
 
[quote name='jam3582']why wouldnt they charge I mean they need to make money somehow correct just to supplement the ability to download these retro games from live servers that need to be mantained and serviced 24/7 . selling all those pokemons and zeldas wont compensate for maintaning those servers up . Its very understandable if they wanna charge for that .[/QUOTE]

You didn't read my post. I said that it would likely be a per title service, not a subscription. Subscription and ongoing payments is exactly what Nintendo has tried so hard to avoid.

I know I wouldn't go for a subscription. That is lame. Lets see. I can download about 500 top tier NES, SNES and N64 games over a period of five years from Nintendo for $495 ($.99 each) and own them forever (and just transfer the files to Revolution2), or I can pay maybe $10 a month (with limited bandwidth/downloads), have access to the same 500 titles that I wanted the other way, but once I stop paying, there goes my games. And in the end, after five years, I have paid $600 and nothing to show for it.

Either way, Nintendo makes pure profit. These games have already had development costs done away with years ago. One just has no advantage to the consumer and costs more. Not a business friendly model at all.
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']I say a subscription service would be best. It would be cheaper for us in the long run, too.

There could be different tiers of the service and each one would cost a bit more but would let you download more games a month.

All Nintendo has ever said is that their online play would be free of subscriptions. They've never said they wouldn't do subscriptions for downloadable content.[/QUOTE]

They haven't talked about this at all is more like it. It is the principle of what they have been after. They haven't wanted to cause any extra costs to the consumer. Especially ongoing ones. They have toyed with it before in Japan and have not found good results. And as I just demonstrated, subscription is neither cheaper, nor beneficial.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']You didn't read my post. I said that it would likely be a per title service, not a subscription. Subscription and ongoing payments is exactly what Nintendo has tried so hard to avoid.

I know I wouldn't go for a subscription. That is lame. Lets see. I can download about 500 top tier NES, SNES and N64 games over a period of five years from Nintendo for $495 ($.99 each) and own them forever (and just transfer the files to Revolution2), or I can pay maybe $10 a month (with limited bandwidth/downloads), have access to the same 500 titles that I wanted the other way, but once I stop paying, there goes my games. And in the end, after five years, I have paid $600 and nothing to show for it.

Either way, Nintendo makes pure profit. These games have already had development costs done away with years ago. One just has no advantage to the consumer and costs more. Not a business friendly model at all.[/QUOTE]

Who's to say Nintendo won't let you keep the games in a subscription-based plan? Hell, you pay for the games, why can't you keep them?

Think of it this way, you spend $500 on $1 games and get 500 of them. Or you could spend $120 in a year and get those same games.

A subscription-based plan would be very good for both consumers and Nintendo.

This is an extremely friendly business model and one that's a helluva lot better than pay per game.
 
As long as you can save the retro games to the hard drive after purchasing, I'd say this has the potential to be the best of the three systems.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Does anyone find that Nintendo's attempt to make Electroplankton thier bridge to casual gamrs kind of sad?[/QUOTE]

What would you suggest?
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Does anyone find that Nintendo's attempt to make Electroplankton thier bridge to casual gamrs kind of sad?[/QUOTE]

Sad? The game looks really really cool. Its something completely different... something fresh... something that might not even be considered a game. It's a risk... sure.. but its exciting. I can see myself buying it and showing it to non-gaming friends... some will play with it for a minute and put it down... others (the more musically inclined) will probably get lost in it. I guess we will see.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Does anyone find that Nintendo's attempt to make Electroplankton thier bridge to casual gamrs kind of sad?[/QUOTE]
Sounds like fanboy bait to me ;)
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Does anyone find that Nintendo's attempt to make Electroplankton thier bridge to casual gamrs kind of sad?[/QUOTE]

My friend is a very casual gamer and after I showed him video of Electroplankton in action he went out and bought a DS and import copy of it. I'd say it is a very good idea.
 
Casual people like movies, television and sports. Something that can identify with, they want characters, a puzzle game isnt a character, it can HAVE character however, but only if it's a really GREAT puzzle game.
 
[quote name='Alpha2']Casual people like movies, television and sports. Something that can identify with, they want characters, a puzzle game isnt a character, it can HAVE character however, but only if it's a really GREAT puzzle game.[/QUOTE]

An example I guess would be Lumines or Tetris back in the day. Though I personally don't love Lumines like everyone else, but that's besides the point.
 
[quote name='Gameboy415']Wow, this thread got huge!

Way back on the first few pages we were talking about Sonic Gems Collection....

I found pics!

http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/sonicgemscollection/screenindex.html

From what I can tell, Sonic: The Fighters, Sonic CD, and Sonic R are in there for sure but who knows what else might show up![/QUOTE]

haha i SO called sonic R being on there. 3dblast and knuckles chaotix, and possibly even shuffle seem like natural choices.
 
What does everyone REALLY want out of a Nintendo console? The more and more I read the more I really don't understand. I right now have a Gamcube and a PS2. I have both because both offer great franchises and what can't be satisfied on one console I can get on the other.

I think even though not groundbreaking Nintendo is doing something right by adding online play and backwards compatibility. The also added DVD playback which doesn't really make a difference but it shows they are listening to the gamer a bit more now.

Does everyone really want them to just duke it out with Sony? I see Microsoft shooting for holy grail of gaming top dog and it looks like it will take them quite awhile to "beat out" the competetion if they ever do for that matter. I still see the XBOX as 1. a console modder's wet dream and 2. a system that lacks Great franchises besides HALO. I don't care for FPS's so the XBOX never really appealed to me. People buy an XBOX and then trick it out so it can play MAME games, old Nintendo games, so on and so forth. I realize there are a lot of other good games and good 3rd party support but I still feel that I can get almost all the games I need on the other 2 systems.

While Sony builds up their intense high def system I will still be playing the games on a regular non-HD TV. While it is obvious that techies love this stuff it doesn't mean too much for me as off right now. I realize prices will come down and it will be the standard later on but it wouldn't sway me one way or the other when buying a console.

I love beautiful graphics and I'm sure I will be drooling over the PS3 when it comes out. The truth however is I will still love Nintendo for their games and their unique-ness. If Zelda had more shading would the game be that much better? So now my question to everyone is WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT FROM A NINTENDO CONSOLE???
 
[quote name='punqsux']haha i SO called sonic R being on there. 3dblast and knuckles chaotix, and possibly even shuffle seem like natural choices.[/QUOTE]

I pray that X-treme shows up even if it's just a one level demo. That would be a huge treat, that's the one game I always think about and say "What if". I'm positive that would've been the best sonic game ever made.
 
[quote name='jkam']What does everyone REALLY want out of a Nintendo console? The more and more I read the more I really don't understand. I right now have a Gamcube and a PS2. I have both because both offer great franchises and what can't be satisfied on one console I can get on the other.

I think even though not groundbreaking Nintendo is doing something right by adding online play and backwards compatibility. The also added DVD playback which doesn't really make a difference but it shows they are listening to the gamer a bit more now.

Does everyone really want them to just duke it out with Sony? I see Microsoft shooting for holy grail of gaming top dog and it looks like it will take them quite awhile to "beat out" the competetion if they ever do for that matter. I still see the XBOX as 1. a console modder's wet dream and 2. a system that lacks Great franchises besides HALO. I don't care for FPS's so the XBOX never really appealed to me. People buy an XBOX and then trick it out so it can play MAME games, old Nintendo games, so on and so forth. I realize there are a lot of other good games and good 3rd party support but I still feel that I can get almost all the games I need on the other 2 systems.

While Sony builds up their intense high def system I will still be playing the games on a regular non-HD TV. While it is obvious that techies love this stuff it doesn't mean too much for me as off right now. I realize prices will come down and it will be the standard later on but it wouldn't sway me one way or the other when buying a console.

I love beautiful graphics and I'm sure I will be drooling over the PS3 when it comes out. The truth however is I will still love Nintendo for their games and their unique-ness. If Zelda had more shading would the game be that much better? So now my question to everyone is WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT FROM A NINTENDO CONSOLE???[/QUOTE]

maybe um a revolution, nah im messing with yah . heres the thing kno one wants nintendo out ( I kno I dont ) but its that they arent helping themselves much out right now with not releasing atleast a tad bit more info about the revolution . I mean what do you expect after looking at the ps3 and xbox 360 conference . I kno I was expecting a revolution but all I got was ho hum sorta like the e3 that featured the GBA GCN connectivity .

I understand DieHard Nintendo fans will support the BIG N one way or the other . But some other fans who want nintendo to be #1 are dissapointed when nintendo decides to stay shut about their future offerings. It just gets really fustrating.
 
[quote name='jKam']I love beautiful graphics and I'm sure I will be drooling over the PS3 when it comes out. The truth however is I will still love Nintendo for their games and their unique-ness. So now my question to everyone is WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT FROM A NINTENDO CONSOLE???[/quote]

The problem I think is no one really knows.

Personally there was a point when I decided I was done with nintendo because they were too busy taking me for granted. I didn't want to miss s new metroid game but I also didn't feel like sticking with a company that refused to grow up (and the obvious lack of a Metroid game on N64 meant I wasn't totally wrong). That was the moment I moved to the Playstation. I vowed never to buy another system from nintendo (outside of the GB since it was the onlything that didn't seem to be talking down to me.) I chose not to buy any consoles untill they learned their lesson to stop censoring games and pretending the person droppign 50 bucks on their games didn't matter as many others did since they quickly dropped to last place.

When the Cube came along I said they had to impress me, make decent games, make games I want to play that dont treat me like a baby and I'll concider it. Eventually they made a few decent fun games or atleast were able to convince several 3rd parties to comeback and make those games for them. I figured they had finally decided to alter their stance and make the types of games I was enjoying on PS2. That's when I decided if I could fine 10 games I wanted to play on the system and none where mario games then I's by it once the system dropped to 150 or less... Which is what I did.

The thing is even to this day it's only a secondary system to me, a great one but by no means my absolut favorite. It's a niche system, like the TurboGrafx16 or the NeoGeo, a few great games but not a huge library you want to have every title of. The PS2 fit this more for me and still does and apparently the PS3 will do so next gen too.

UltimatelyI think the only way Nintendo can "win" is to change their appearance and move to a new state. Start fresh, Stop playing the "all ages" game kid's arnt the where the money is, but they cant do that because they feel there'll be no new gamers later on....who will eventually out grow them and go to their competators. They're basically caught in a catch-22 and they can either change and challange Sony for hardcore gamers which they'll likely have a rought time with and spend too much money on or they can keep the "all ages" persona, not make a lot of money but still make enough to stay afloat like they are right now. Online for Nintendo is only a result of the "all ages" they cater to becoming more and more net savy since the SNES days...
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Does anyone find that Nintendo's attempt to make Electroplankton thier bridge to casual gamrs kind of sad?[/QUOTE]

Almost any item that reaches a previously untapped audience is going to get its share of WTF? from those already consuming the mainstream products. Keep in mind plenty of people out find the enticement of your favorite game unfathomable, no matter what that game may be.
 
I have to say, I was disappointed by the Nintendo conference. Last year, I felt they gave the best show. This year, I think they were arguably the worst. I know they seem to think their ideas are so great that everyone else will try to steal it if its revealed, but it's going to be very hard to battle the hype that's going to build for the PS3 and the Xbox 360 if you have nothing to give to the gamers. I pray Nintendo is smart enough to release all of the details (Controller, price, specs, Miyamoto's new game, etc) a month or two before the 360 launches. This way, maybe they can entice consumers to wait for their console. I know I'll get it, but I'll get them all...the casual gamer is the one I think would get a 360 now and not want or have the cash for the Revolution a few months later.
 
[quote name='jkam']What does everyone REALLY want out of a Nintendo console? The more and more I read the more I really don't understand. I right now have a Gamcube and a PS2. I have both because both offer great franchises and what can't be satisfied on one console I can get on the other.

I think even though not groundbreaking Nintendo is doing something right by adding online play and backwards compatibility. The also added DVD playback which doesn't really make a difference but it shows they are listening to the gamer a bit more now.

Does everyone really want them to just duke it out with Sony? I see Microsoft shooting for holy grail of gaming top dog and it looks like it will take them quite awhile to "beat out" the competetion if they ever do for that matter. I still see the XBOX as 1. a console modder's wet dream and 2. a system that lacks Great franchises besides HALO. I don't care for FPS's so the XBOX never really appealed to me. People buy an XBOX and then trick it out so it can play MAME games, old Nintendo games, so on and so forth. I realize there are a lot of other good games and good 3rd party support but I still feel that I can get almost all the games I need on the other 2 systems.

While Sony builds up their intense high def system I will still be playing the games on a regular non-HD TV. While it is obvious that techies love this stuff it doesn't mean too much for me as off right now. I realize prices will come down and it will be the standard later on but it wouldn't sway me one way or the other when buying a console.

I love beautiful graphics and I'm sure I will be drooling over the PS3 when it comes out. The truth however is I will still love Nintendo for their games and their unique-ness. If Zelda had more shading would the game be that much better? So now my question to everyone is WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT FROM A NINTENDO CONSOLE???[/QUOTE]

What I want is an end to attempts to fight battles that are hopeless and instead find a separate path where the product can be taken on its own merit rather than how it compares to those from companies better equipped to wage tech wars.

That they appear to have targeted a low power, low price platofrm with distinguishing features yet to be revealed offers a glimmer of hope. I think it's actually good for Nintendo to keep their distance from the cutting edge in hardware as it only leads to demands for them to support functions that aren't part of their company focus. Note how they've found themselves in the same position as Microsoft when it came to DVD playback. Both companies just wanted to use the disc standard as a cost effective way to distribute multi-gigabyte games but the demand to also play movies cannot be avoided, even though the market is thoroughly saturated with cheap DVD players. So Nintendo too is going the route of offering an optional remote/license for the function.

"There. You happy? Can we go back to selling games now?"

Holding back from making HDTV support a big feature lets them stay free of the whole formats wars issue and all the other attendent hassles. They can sell a game machine, not a media player to promote businesses they aren't in. This might be a disappointment for some nostalgic for Nintendo era of dominance but those days aren't coming back. Better to avoid the big battle and concentrate on producing stuff that sells because it's good without challenging the viewer to stay continent at both ends.
 
[quote name='alongx']I have to say, I was disappointed by the Nintendo conference. Last year, I felt they gave the best show. This year, I think they were arguably the worst. I know they seem to think their ideas are so great that everyone else will try to steal it if its revealed, but it's going to be very hard to battle the hype that's going to build for the PS3 and the Xbox 360 if you have nothing to give to the gamers. I pray Nintendo is smart enough to release all of the details (Controller, price, specs, Miyamoto's new game, etc) a month or two before the 360 launches. This way, maybe they can entice consumers to wait for their console. I know I'll get it, but I'll get them all...the casual gamer is the one I think would get a 360 now and not want or have the cash for the Revolution a few months later.[/QUOTE]

It depends. One reason they may be holding out for a launch in the Q3/Q4 potrtion of next year is that they're betting on IBM being able to produce the chipset on a 65 nm process. With the relatively modest performance goal (3x or 4x GameCube) this could make for a remarkably inexpensive machine. There is all sorts of interesting ways that could be leveraged. For instance, trojaning it into homes by selling as part of a bundled party game system with software and multiple controllers. Pitch it as a single application system that by no small coincidence can play all these other games...
 
[quote name='epobirs']What I want is an end to attempts to fight battles that are hopeless and instead find a separate path where the product can be taken on its own merit rather than how it compares to those from companies better equipped to wage tech wars.

That they appear to have targeted a low power, low price platofrm with distinguishing features yet to be revealed offers a glimmer of hope. I think it's actually good for Nintendo to keep their distance from the cutting edge in hardware as it only leads to demands for them to support functions that aren't part of their company focus. Note how they've found themselves in the same position as Microsoft when it came to DVD playback. Both companies just wanted to use the disc standard as a cost effective way to distribute multi-gigabyte games but the demand to also play movies cannot be avoided, even though the market is thoroughly saturated with cheap DVD players. So Nintendo too is going the route of offering an optional remote/license for the function.

"There. You happy? Can we go back to selling games now?"

Holding back from making HDTV support a big feature lets them stay free of the whole formats wars issue and all the other attendent hassles. They can sell a game machine, not a media player to promote businesses they aren't in. This might be a disappointment for some nostalgic for Nintendo era of dominance but those days aren't coming back. Better to avoid the big battle and concentrate on producing stuff that sells because it's good without challenging the viewer to stay continent at both ends.[/QUOTE]

I agree...

From what Nintendo has said is they do want to go down their own path so to speak but then again it doesn't help when Reggie compares sales of the DS and the PSP. If they really want to head in a different direction they shouldn't bother with those charts and graphs. It was kind of silly to say we are a viable platform in a gaming industry we don't want a part of. I can understand when the day ends they still need to sell their product but why compare?

I would think though that the media and gamers add fuel to the fire when they hear that the next Nintendo won't be an all out technical achievement. Playstation and Xbox fans talk the system down while Nintendo lovers defend it.

Hopefully their revolutionary idea will actually set them apart so they can be based on their own merits rather than their technical shortcomings.
 
I don't understand how you could store these download games.....

Average nes game is around 300kb..... So thats fine
Average Snes game 300kb-3 megs... Getting bigger
Average N64 game.. 10 megs-50 megs... Thats pretty large.... I wonder how they would work that.......

I'm all about paying to download games, but only if I can keep them.... Maybe the system burns discs.... I'm hoping they sell collection discs... Nintendo could fit all of there n64 games on 1 dvd... All of their snes and nes games on 1 dvd....
I wonder if we can get gameboy games....

What think is so cool about revolution is I think we will learn you can make your own games on it.... Probably not 3-d, but I think their going to have a 2-d video game maker...

This system is going to do something drastically different from the others... I'm curious what it is....

I see this retailing for 149.99 or maybe even 99.99.... With the downloadable games they can make money back on the system.....

I honestly think this is so small because their going to have a option goggle headset you can buy...
 
[quote name='StealthySeal']i don't care what you all say...

super smash brothers online at launch for the nintnedo revoloution

pure gaming bliss[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that it was never mentioned as a launch title, though I could be wrong. I thought he just said it was coming to the Revolution, without mentioning when.
 
[quote name='basketkase543']I'm pretty sure that it was never mentioned as a launch title, though I could be wrong. I thought he just said it was coming to the Revolution, without mentioning when.[/QUOTE]

it was specifically mentioned as a launch title with online.
 
Am I the only one not disapointed with the conference? Online play and huge BC has already sold me on the system, long before any actual games are shown (N's stradegy at work).

BTW, who's to say the older games aren't streamed, ala Sega Channel? Could keep things reletivly cheap or even free. Imagine a network where they have a rotated block of X amount of games. IE 20 NES games a month, streamed over Gamespy servers, with games getting swapped in and out once a month.

Revolution indeed.
 
if you really can use Compact Flash cards I have a 256mb card I'm not doing anything with, I wouldnt mind filling it with a few games to plug into a Revo... but it's not like I plan on paying for them....since I already have them... legally, on cartridges!
 
[quote name='CouRageouS']If I wasn't already sold on the Revolution, this would help a lot..
revo_7l.jpg

They flipped the ports so the Wavebird receivers would fit. Great job Nintendo, now if the PS3 has something similar to let me look past the boomerang, I would be set.

More pics:
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n10/e3_2005/revo/[/QUOTE]

Well, this makes the Revolution the first console that appears to be backwards compatible with controllers. But can it support wired GC controllers and wireless Revolution controllers simultaneously, allowing for 4+ gamers on a single console?
 
Well, this makes the Revolution the first console that appears to be backwards compatible with controllers
Click to expand...
...If you ignore the Playstation2.
But can it support wired GC controllers and wireless Revolution controllers simultaneously, allowing for 4+ gamers on a single console?
Click to expand...
We dont even know what a revolution controller looks like so we dont even know if we can use Cube controllers with the new games yet, let alone trying to add more than 4 players.
 
I have a suspicion the PS3 will have controller ports on it too. When you put the PS3 side by side a PS2 (horizontally), it makes me wonder if you can slide over the left side to reveal controller ports/memory card slots. It would make sense and make me very pleased.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top