Why is Everyone ALREADY saying the Revolution will be the WEAKEST Next-gen Console??

[quote name='epobirs']Because you canna change the laws of physics, Captain!

Nintendo has indicated what the physical size of the unit will be and everything follows from there. We know it will contain a DVD drive, likely a slot loader similar to those used in Apple notebooks. That consumes several cubic inches of the interior right there. There will also be a pair of wireless hosts, one for networking and one for controllers. This will be at least one separate chip from the CPU and AV sections. Wireless isn't something that gets integrated in system processors due to potential ugliness with mixing analog with noisy digital logic.

So we're left with an awfully tight package. From Nintendo's description the entire thing will be smaller than just the cooling solution in the Xbox 360. (Likewise for the PS3 but we haven't been shown the interior of that yet.) This means the Revolution system board has to be very small and run extremely cool. Unless Nintendo is is going to have you store this thing in your refrigerator the size puts some severe limitations on the processing capacity. We know Nintendo is getting thei CPU and video chips from the same two vendors supplying those functions to the Xbox 360.

Shipping late next year may offer access to a smaller process level (65nm) than used for the 360 chips (90nm) but that won't come anywhere remotely close to allowing a comparable chipset in that tiny space. Ergo, it is unavoidable the Revolution chipset will occupy a lot less transistor real estate and correspondingly possess much less horsepower and functionality. There is no avoiding it.[/QUOTE]

This is the only logical answer other than rampant speculation. I don't know much about this stuff but I'm assuming that the more powerful the system is the more cooling you need. Also, I guess you need a little room for airflow and a fan or something and based on the small design of the Revolution that has been promised this isn't likely. What about the PSP though? It's almost as powerful as a PS2 and less than 1/3 of the size of the promised size of the Revolution and it also contains a pretty sweet screen (which the Revolutuion won't have). Is it too unrealistic to expect that in a year's time Nintendo couldn't develope something 3 times as big and on par with the PS3 and 360?
 
Perhaps here is the place to ask; Nintendo stated backwards compatibility with the Gamecube on Revolution, yet they have a slot-loading disc drive. How can this be reconciled?

myke.
 
[quote name='javeryh']This is the only logical answer other than rampant speculation. I don't know much about this stuff but I'm assuming that the more powerful the system is the more cooling you need. Also, I guess you need a little room for airflow and a fan or something and based on the small design of the Revolution that has been promised this isn't likely. What about the PSP though? It's almost as powerful as a PS2 and less than 1/3 of the size of the promised size of the Revolution and it also contains a pretty sweet screen (which the Revolutuion won't have). Is it too unrealistic to expect that in a year's time Nintendo couldn't develope something 3 times as big and on par with the PS3 and 360?[/QUOTE]
You've got to remember though, the PSP was created and launched 5 years after the PS2 and it still isn't quite as powerful.
 
[quote name='javeryh']This is the only logical answer other than rampant speculation. I don't know much about this stuff but I'm assuming that the more powerful the system is the more cooling you need. Also, I guess you need a little room for airflow and a fan or something and based on the small design of the Revolution that has been promised this isn't likely. What about the PSP though? It's almost as powerful as a PS2 and less than 1/3 of the size of the promised size of the Revolution and it also contains a pretty sweet screen (which the Revolutuion won't have). Is it too unrealistic to expect that in a year's time Nintendo couldn't develope something 3 times as big and on par with the PS3 and 360?[/QUOTE]


My guess on that is that with the PSP the games are limited to that size of screen. The detail will not be needed as it would be on say a 50" HDTV. With any variable (ie screen size) comes trouble with maximizing graphic output.

This is why some requirements of PC games are so large. They can make a similar game run on a lesser system (ie doom 3 on Xbox) but without a standard platform they require much more processing power to compensate for variables.

Same thing happens when you take the screen away from the PSP.
 
Yes it is unrealistic seeing as they've shown no interest in beating anyone in the graphics depatment, they go out and get stock equipment and squeeze it down as far as it can go, thats the extent of their hardware development. The best you can hope for is top tire PC grade graphics, there's nohing wrong with that it's just not as powerful as the other two systems.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Perhaps here is the place to ask; Nintendo stated backwards compatibility with the Gamecube on Revolution, yet they have a slot-loading disc drive. How can this be reconciled?

myke.[/QUOTE]

The same way a car CD player can play mini CDs or a mini-mac can play mini DVDs. I'm not sure how the function operates, but it does. *shrug*

(I'm just worried about GCN games getting scratched. Does someone know the exact operation that would keep this from happening?)
 
Why should they show everything their console target date isn't around Christmas time, Yes it is good to look impressive but they have a lot of time to perfect what they are trying to do. Iwata even said the exact console will even be smaller. I mean XBOX wants to be out by Christmas time so let them show what they have to they have set their target, with the PS3 that is just great that they can show what they will have so early, I just hope Bill(GATES) decides to make the XBox even stronger now that he knows what Sony is doing.

I will definitly be picking up Revolution during launch and enjoy all the stuff that it will offer like taking NINTENDO games online, and 20+ years of Nintendo gaming.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']The same way a car CD player can play mini CDs or a mini-mac can play mini DVDs. I'm not sure how the function operates, but it does. *shrug*

(I'm just worried about GCN games getting scratched. Does someone know the exact operation that would keep this from happening?)[/QUOTE]

I didn't think that car cd players could play mini (3") cds. They can?

myke.
...sorry, I'm still skeptical.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I didn't think that car cd players could play mini (3") cds. They can?

myke.
...sorry, I'm still skeptical.[/QUOTE]

That's fine. I'm still skeptical that they won't scratch my GCN discs to death. I need to find out how the mechanism for finding the smaller disc would work. (I'm very protective of my games.)
 
2, 3 times anit that bad. Just think of RE4 times 3. That's your power! Plus when the system is released, it will have the most games.(NES,SNES,N64,GC):booty:
 
[quote name='dudecool320']2, 3 times anit that bad. Just think of RE4 times 3. That's your power! Plus when the system is released, it will have the most games.(NES,SNES,N64,GC):booty:[/QUOTE]

Good point!
*Goes and buys a Revolution on the black market*
*Boots up the system* ("Wow" less than 30 seconds!!!)
*Inserts RE4*
*clunk*

What the???
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000270043981/


:rofl:

What did they expect? They aren't showing anything and have said the thing will be completely different (size and weight). What did they expect?:roll:
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']Good point!
*Goes and buys a Revolution on the black market*
*Boots up the system* ("Wow" less than 30 seconds!!!)
*Inserts RE4*
*clunk*

What the???
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000270043981/


:rofl:

What did they expect? They aren't showing anything and have said the thing will be completely different (size and weight). What did they expect?:roll:[/QUOTE]

That's funny b/c IGN posted an article today that they actually got to use the Revolution prototype and that the slot worked fine:

The Revolution's slot-loading drive is unbelievably gorgeous when viewed up close. It really is striking. The drive is not just illuminated, but surrounded by a sleek blue light, and it accepts both GameCube Optical Discs and new 12cm discs designed specifically for Revolution. The interesting bit is that the drive easily takes both sizes without any fuss.

Also, for those that are saying the Revo will not support HD (which has never been stated anywhere), here is what IGN says about the outputs on the back:

What about the back of the unit, though? Tech-nuts want to know, what kind of outputs does the machine have? Well, there are two USB ports and a power connection. The machine features no digital audio out. Instead, it boasts a single proprietary output for video and audio. The output looks exactly like the component out on GameCube. We asked Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto if Revolution would play high-definition games and he told us that he wasn't sure if he was allowed to say yet. Still, we expect a bare minimum of 480p support and likely 720p or 1080i, too, given that previous comments from Nintendo execs suggested that the platform would be able to hook up to a computer monitor.

Then again, this thing is not even close to final.
 
[quote name='lebowsky']That's funny b/c IGN posted an article today that they actually got to use the Revolution prototype and that the slot worked fine:

The Revolution's slot-loading drive is unbelievably gorgeous when viewed up close. It really is striking. The drive is not just illuminated, but surrounded by a sleek blue light, and it accepts both GameCube Optical Discs and new 12cm discs designed specifically for Revolution. The interesting bit is that the drive easily takes both sizes without any fuss.

Also, for those that are saying the Revo will not support HD (which has never been stated anywhere), here is what IGN says about the outputs on the back:

What about the back of the unit, though? Tech-nuts want to know, what kind of outputs does the machine have? Well, there are two USB ports and a power connection. The machine features no digital audio out. Instead, it boasts a single proprietary output for video and audio. The output looks exactly like the component out on GameCube. We asked Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto if Revolution would play high-definition games and he told us that he wasn't sure if he was allowed to say yet. Still, we expect a bare minimum of 480p support and likely 720p or 1080i, too, given that previous comments from Nintendo execs suggested that the platform would be able to hook up to a computer monitor.

Then again, this thing is not even close to final.[/QUOTE]

True, I read that article as well. I guess the other just stuck in my mind when I decided to quote. But I would probably believe IGN more, since they are part of the conspiracy.;) Also it's joystiq.:roll:
 
hopefully less power means less money required to develop games which means lower prices. how much better can graphics get without having the hdtv required to unleash their potential? in the end, i hope revolution goes a different direction by concentrating on gameplay and a reasonable price rather then wowing us with what's under the hood. it seems sony and ms are trying to outdo each other on the hardware (mo money) and the graphics (mo money) and the media formats (mo money)...nintendo is like hey we just care about the games.

imagine 2 consoles in the $400+ price point with $70 games, and then nintendo comes in at $249 with $45 games.
 
[quote name='gaelan']hopefully less power means less money required to develop games which means lower prices. how much better can graphics get without having the hdtv required to unleash their potential? in the end, i hope revolution goes a different direction by concentrating on gameplay and a reasonable price rather then wowing us with what's under the hood. it seems sony and ms are trying to outdo each other on the hardware (mo money) and the graphics (mo money) and the media formats (mo money)...nintendo is like hey we just care about the games.

imagine 2 consoles in the $400+ price point with $70 games, and then nintendo comes in at $249 with $45 games.[/QUOTE]

Some people have been trotting out this rationale for the Revolution attracting a plethora of low-end developers but it doesn't work that way in real life. As we've already seen, a game can be produced very cheaply for any system provided you dont set your sights too high. You aren't going to match God of War on the cheap but you can produce a game that would have been regarded as stunning if released in the previous generation but looks better than what could be done yet remains a budget title.

There is an old saying that God favors the side with the stronger Army. Developers work that way as well. A low end project can be made to work on any system but the first choice is almost always the machine that offers the best chance of putting braces on the kid's teeth and keeping up the mortgage payments.
 
Knowing Nintendo they'd likely have the 250 system with 60 dollar games. I think Nintendo might actually try to court small developers and start ups trying to get into the buisness. Yeah the big and medium guys can show a game to any number of publishers but they dont all have to bite at everything they're shown. I remember this really cool dodgeball game being developed specifically for the PS2 by a small company (I've lost the web site long ago unfortunatly), I saw this like 3 years ago and Swore I'd buy it if it ever came out. it has yet to ever show up here. Why? because no publisher ever picked it up, the guys were small, no one had faith in their product, maybe they just plain ran out of production capital and went into chapter 11.

The point is if some small publisher or in this case prehaps, big company thinking small, were to give a hand to a start up developer they might not only get a kick ass game that nobody saw comming but they might also build a loyal dev studio that could become the next Rare or make the next Mario or Pokemon.
 
[quote name='sisco1986']No really?? I didn't know that :roll: , I'm simply stating why bitch and complain about what people are saying about a system that hasn't been even had it's techincal information laid out yet (let alone a demo), a console is a giant block of marble, what masterpiece you make of it is not dependent on the hardware, it's dependent on the skill (I'm a graphic art student, I know).[/QUOTE]


Well, i'm a writer, and i know that the most talented writer in the world can do a lot more with a stack of paper than a post-it note.

I'm a mechanical engineer, and I can do a lot more with a warehouse full of components than whatever I can strip off of a rusted out '85 Hyundai.

I'm a Juggler, and my talents look much cooler when I have more than 2 balls to juggle.

I'm an interior decorator, and I can make some amazing things with an unlimited budget, but give me 100$ and you have to settle for the best I can do with that.

moral of the story? The masterpieces a creative person can make, all other things being equal, is DIRECTLY limited by their means to realize those dreams.
 
Nintendo may or may not be the weakest, but they most likely will not be coming out a year after xbox..if xbox drops this november...sony is releasing in japan in march of next year allegedly...and nintendo said they will try to beat sony to the market..just because the USA will not have a ps3 or revolution for a year after the xbox, doesn't mean that they have an extra year of technology built in, it will only be 4 - 6 months, as Sony and Nintendo will be releasing in japan first
 
Well IMO if the Xbox and PS3 only cost $399 the GC will have to be $149 or less since it will be much less powerful
 
[quote name='Leggo']Well, i'm a writer, and i know that the most talented writer in the world can do a lot more with a stack of paper than a post-it note.

I'm a mechanical engineer, and I can do a lot more with a warehouse full of components than whatever I can strip off of a rusted out '85 Hyundai.

I'm a Juggler, and my talents look much cooler when I have more than 2 balls to juggle.

I'm an interior decorator, and I can make some amazing things with an unlimited budget, but give me 100$ and you have to settle for the best I can do with that.

moral of the story? The masterpieces a creative person can make, all other things being equal, is DIRECTLY limited by their means to realize those dreams.[/QUOTE]

The problem being that all is not equal.

IT doesn't matter how much paper you have if you can only fill it with hackneyed, poorly constructed bullshit.

It doesn't matter how big the parts wherehouse is if you don't know how to use 96% of the stock.

It doesn't matter if you have 8 balls to juggle if you can't do it for more than a few seconds.

It doesn't matter how much money you have if you don't possess an artistic eye for decorating.

Better technology does not cardinally result in a superior product. Look at all the failed consoles who tried to depose the gameboy, the N64 vs the PSX, or the recent incarnations of Windows (ESPECIALLY Windows ME.... God what a travesty).
 
[quote name='Leggo']Well, i'm a writer, and i know that the most talented writer in the world can do a lot more with a stack of paper than a post-it note.

I'm a mechanical engineer, and I can do a lot more with a warehouse full of components than whatever I can strip off of a rusted out '85 Hyundai.

I'm a Juggler, and my talents look much cooler when I have more than 2 balls to juggle.

I'm an interior decorator, and I can make some amazing things with an unlimited budget, but give me 100$ and you have to settle for the best I can do with that.

moral of the story? The masterpieces a creative person can make, all other things being equal, is DIRECTLY limited by their means to realize those dreams.[/QUOTE]

Did you ever see those dudes who can paint an entire scene like the last supper or the boulevard of broken dreams on a golf tee or some other ridiculously small thing like the tip of a pin? Those guys can sure do a lot with practically nothing. I bet if they came over my house to paint the TV room they could do a much better job than I could and I would pay them a lot of money to paint and watch my fish while I'm at the store buying fruit and hamburgers for dinner because I like watermelon and frozen daquiris in the summer because it is too hot for soup.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']Nintendo may or may not be the weakest, but they most likely will not be coming out a year after xbox..if xbox drops this november...sony is releasing in japan in march of next year allegedly...and nintendo said they will try to beat sony to the market..just because the USA will not have a ps3 or revolution for a year after the xbox, doesn't mean that they have an extra year of technology built in, it will only be 4 - 6 months, as Sony and Nintendo will be releasing in japan first[/QUOTE]

And you know this because? The N64 was out only six to eight weeks in Japan before it came out here. I'm not sure about the GCN timeframe, since I was not around videogames during that time. And the DS launched Stateside before it did in Japan. Nintendo knows the value of the American audience. You don't know that it won't be a simultaneous launch, or very near to each other launch. They have already confirmed that Zeld: TP will be available worldwide before the close of this year. There is not often a huge turnaround time for Nintendo for different locations these days.
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']And you know this because? The N64 was out only six to eight weeks in Japan before it came out here. I'm not sure about the GCN timeframe, since I was not around videogames during that time. And the DS launched Stateside before it did in Japan. Nintendo knows the value of the American audience. You don't know that it won't be a simultaneous launch, or very near to each other launch. They have already confirmed that Zeld: TP will be available worldwide before the close of this year. There is not often a huge turnaround time for Nintendo for different locations these days.[/QUOTE]

Except after the DS launched we saw major titles released in Japan that took four or more months to appear here. Despite a severe drought of post-launch releases they were in no hurry to get those translations done. The fact is they launched first here to exploit the Xmas season with little priority on avoiding a game drought. Not a new tale in the business.

The fact stands that the great majority of Japanese video game releases debut in Japan at least one quarter ahead of US version and often up to a year passes before the release beyond the native territory. The worldwide marketshare of the Japanese market has been declining and that affects their choies but the inclination remains to not allocate the resources required to speed up the releases. Zelda will see a short timeframe to worldwide release because it is to a large extent the only reason for people only own a GameCube to go into a software store this Fall. Getting a massive seller out worldwide is deaparately needed to remind people they're still a console company.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Except after the DS launched we saw major titles released in Japan that took four or more months to appear here. Despite a severe drought of post-launch releases they were in hurry to get those translations done. The fact is they launched first here to exploit the Xmas season with little priority on avoiding a game drought. Not a new tale in the business.

The fact stands that the great majority of Japanese video game releases debut in Japan at least one quarter ahead of US version and often up to a year passes before the release beyond the native territory. The worldwide marketshare of the Japanese market has been declining and that affects their choies but the inclination remains to not allocate the resources required to speed up the releases. Zelda will see a short timeframe to worldwide release because it is to a large extent the only reason for people only own a GameCube to go into a software store this Fall. Getting a massive seller out worldwide is deaparately needed to remind people they're still a console company.[/QUOTE]

You are still denying the facts. You stated that things still require a 3 month to 12 month turnaround. Not so, especially with Nintendo. Like I stated about the N64 (1996), it was less than two months between releases. And that was nearly a decade ago. Sure, Christmas may have been part of the reason for the states release of NDS, but surely not the only reason, if so then why would they not have wanted a simultaneous release? Nintendo surely sees that it is good to cater to an American market. And Zelda is not the only product with likewise close releases. Most, if not all, of Nintendo's products that eventually come to the states have just a month or two difference (and certainly not a full year). But going off of your reasoning that Zelda is a huge franchise, what could be even more huge? Maybe a Revolution? All the more reason to have it wash upon these shores as early as possible. Remember, even if Nintendo does get out the gate before Sony (they sure didn't leave us reason to believe this is still true), they still have the 360 coming off the shelves here in America that they are going to want to slow down as soon as possible.
 
New interview today. Excerpt:


"If the first entrant always wins the market, the Dreamcast must have won the race against the PS2, for example. There are many precedents like that in the past. The first to market is not necessarily the winner in the race," he said. "But we cannot afford to be too late. That's a very important point. Right now we are keeping many secrets, but by the end of this year, I believe we really need to express to the worldwide audience what the mysterious proposals we have are all about. Otherwise we will be in an extremely different position."
-Satoru Iwata


http://cube.ign.com/articles/617/617814p1.html

So it's official. We should know pretty much everything by the time Xbox 360 launches and Sony will launch before Nintendo, but Nintendo won't be too late to the party (mid-2006).
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']You are still denying the facts. You stated that things still require a 3 month to 12 month turnaround. Not so, especially with Nintendo. Like I stated about the N64 (1996), it was less than two months between releases. And that was nearly a decade ago. Sure, Christmas may have been part of the reason for the states release of NDS, but surely not the only reason, if so then why would they not have wanted a simultaneous release? Nintendo surely sees that it is good to cater to an American market. And Zelda is not the only product with likewise close releases. Most, if not all, of Nintendo's products that eventually come to the states have just a month or two difference (and certainly not a full year). But going off of your reasoning that Zelda is a huge franchise, what could be even more huge? Maybe a Revolution? All the more reason to have it wash upon these shores as early as possible. Remember, even if Nintendo does get out the gate before Sony (they sure didn't leave us reason to believe this is still true), they still have the 360 coming off the shelves here in America that they are going to want to slow down as soon as possible.[/QUOTE]

Don't try to put words in my mouth. I never said a lengthy time to US release was REQUIRED, I said it was routine, largely due to a lack of interest in spending the money to make near-simultaneous releases more frequent. Most effort don't start in earnest until the Japanese product has shipped. Starting the the localization process before then is more expensive because personnel need to be available for communicating between the core team and those handling the translation and every change late in the prject becomes a change for the localization team as well. In some old games the process was trivial. The only text might be a little story setup at the very beginning and some menu screens but that is increasingly rare. More an more often there is not only a fair amount of text but also voice work. A company can be understandably reluctant to get any of the English language cast into the recording studio before the script is completely set in stone.

The situation is much worse for a hardware platform launch. Microsoft is promising a near-simultaneous launch is all three major world markets and the question has naturally arisen as to adequate supplies of product, particularly when some of the silicon isn't final yet. (Developers are now receiving Beta hardware kits which as the name implies is close enough to the real thing to get serious about using all of the hardware but the final testing stage will be very intense as they'll only have true identical to retail machines within a few weeks of the deadline to delivering a final build for manufacturing. Trying to really push the hardware hard in alaunch title is futile due to this.) The same issue would apply to Nintendo in attempting the same thing. In both cases the added problem is having Europe covered. That region, as you might recall, got to wait a good while for the DS but did get a much better launch title selection as some compensation.

Europe is a problem for a number of reasons, many duplicated in the lesser Asian markets. (Not lesser by population but by economic ability to buy a new game platform in sufficient numbers to justify the localization investment.) The recent moves toward European federalism simplify dome of the old hassles but there is still plenty of problems with languages and conumer product laws changing every fifteen feet compared to Japan or North America. The biggest annoyance in the massive North American market is Francophone by law Quebec. A lot of publishers simply don't sell their product there until it is also being sold in France and can share the same translations for manual and in-game text and speech.

Releasing a new electronic product in Europe is getting to be very complicated. Having everything in order in the same time period as the product is launch everywhere else is no small task. On top of that there is the aforementioned issue of having enough hardware and factory capacity to fill the orders. Do you give every region inadequate supplies or do you do a launch staggered over as long as a year so that the launch hysteria settles down before you have to build up supplies for the initial sales rush elsewhere. Then too, there is the question of problems in the product. Sony had a near disaster with the PS2 launch. The chipset had always been designed to be produced at .18 micron. The full function dev kits used .25 micron chips because nobody on the planet was in mass production .18 parts yet. Sony was betting their factory would be up and running in time to produce chips for the Japanese launch.

They lost that bet.

At .25 the EE and GS chips were very large and thus very costly. On top of that the yields were awful, rumor to be as low as 20% on some wafers, which made them really, really, expensive. Sony choice was to either push back the Japanese launch several months and the US launch as well or go ahead and take a major loss per unit to make the launch date. Halting the growth of Dreamcast and securing their base before Nintendo and new player Microsoft could make their moves was deemed too important, so they went ahead with a launch that cost them several months of delay before the PS2 became profitable. Fortunately for Sony, the plant wa finally up and running in time for the production of machines for the US launch.

If they had committed to a near-simultaneous Japan-US launch the disaster would have been immensely greater, either in financial loss or a delayed launch compromising their market lead over the three competing console makers. That is the inherent risk of trying to make everyone happy.

For Nintendo at this point it doesn't matter how long a lead time the Xbox 360 or PS3 has over Revolution. They've plainly admitted they aren't going to compete at that level. The difference between what can be done on these machines will be as plain as the division between a high-end DX8 PC game and what DX9 games are now bringing to PC gamers. It isn't in Nintendo's interest to pursue such a battle. The modest upgrade of 3X-4X the GC's throughput lets them a much lower SRP at launch and is more than enough to keep cranking out conventional franchise entries and pursue new areas as they say they intend.

The GameCube's low price was a not a bad approach. They just failed on other parts of the formula. They picked up a fair number of sales as secondary system for people who already owned a PS2 or Xbox but would still show up for the big Nintendo fa\ranchise. Sucked for third party on the GameCube and the royalties part of Nintendo's business but meant a lot better reach for first party titles than if the machine had a higher price and made shoppers think harder about how much they wanted another machine for those few titles. Nintendo has a chance to do it over again but fill in some of areas they failed at last time. They have zero chance of taking the #1 position again but they can revive their console business without that.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Don't try to put words in my mouth. I never said a lengthy time to US release was REQUIRED, I said it was routine, largely due to a lack of interest in spending the money to make near-simultaneous releases more frequent. Most effort don't start in earnest until the Japanese product has shipped. Starting the the localization process before then is more expensive because personnel need to be available for communicating between the core team and those handling the translation and every change late in the prject becomes a change for the localization team as well. In some old games the process was trivial. The only text might be a little story setup at the very beginning and some menu screens but that is increasingly rare. More an more often there is not only a fair amount of text but also voice work. A company can be understandably reluctant to get any of the English language cast into the recording studio before the script is completely set in stone.

The situation is much worse for a hardware platform launch. Microsoft is promising a near-simultaneous launch is all three major world markets and the question has naturally arisen as to adequate supplies of product, particularly when some of the silicon isn't final yet. (Developers are now receiving Beta hardware kits which as the name implies is close enough to the real thing to get serious about using all of the hardware but the final testing stage will be very intense as they'll only have true identical to retail machines within a few weeks of the deadline to delivering a final build for manufacturing. Trying to really push the hardware hard in alaunch title is futile due to this.) The same issue would apply to Nintendo in attempting the same thing. In both cases the added problem is having Europe covered. That region, as you might recall, got to wait a good while for the DS but did get a much better launch title selection as some compensation.

Europe is a problem for a number of reasons, many duplicated in the lesser Asian markets. (Not lesser by population but by economic ability to buy a new game platform in sufficient numbers to justify the localization investment.) The recent moves toward European federalism simplify dome of the old hassles but there is still plenty of problems with languages and conumer product laws changing every fifteen feet compared to Japan or North America. The biggest annoyance in the massive North American market is Francophone by law Quebec. A lot of publishers simply don't sell their product there until it is also being sold in France and can share the same translations for manual and in-game text and speech.

Releasing a new electronic product in Europe is getting to be very complicated. Having everything in order in the same time period as the product is launch everywhere else is no small task. On top of that there is the aforementioned issue of having enough hardware and factory capacity to fill the orders. Do you give every region inadequate supplies or do you do a launch staggered over as long as a year so that the launch hysteria settles down before you have to build up supplies for the initial sales rush elsewhere. Then too, there is the question of problems in the product. Sony had a near disaster with the PS2 launch. The chipset had always been designed to be produced at .18 micron. The full function dev kits used .25 micron chips because nobody on the planet was in mass production .18 parts yet. Sony was betting their factory would be up and running in time to produce chips for the Japanese launch.

They lost that bet.

At .25 the EE and GS chips were very large and thus very costly. On top of that the yields were awful, rumor to be as low as 20% on some wafers, which made them really, really, expensive. Sony choice was to either push back the Japanese launch several months and the US launch as well or go ahead and take a major loss per unit to make the launch date. Halting the growth of Dreamcast and securing their base before Nintendo and new player Microsoft could make their moves was deemed too important, so they went ahead with a launch that cost them several months of delay before the PS2 became profitable. Fortunately for Sony, the plant wa finally up and running in time for the production of machines for the US launch.

If they had committed to a near-simultaneous Japan-US launch the disaster would have been immensely greater, either in financial loss or a delayed launch compromising their market lead over the three competing console makers. That is the inherent risk of trying to make everyone happy.

For Nintendo at this point it doesn't matter how long a lead time the Xbox 360 or PS3 has over Revolution. They've plainly admitted they aren't going to compete at that level. The difference between what can be done on these machines will be as plain as the division between a high-end DX8 PC game and what DX9 games are now bringing to PC gamers. It isn't in Nintendo's interest to pursue such a battle. The modest upgrade of 3X-4X the GC's throughput lets them a much lower SRP at launch and is more than enough to keep cranking out conventional franchise entries and pursue new areas as they say they intend.

The GameCube's low price was a not a bad approach. They just failed on other parts of the formula. They picked up a fair number of sales as secondary system for people who already owned a PS2 or Xbox but would still show up for the big Nintendo fa\ranchise. Sucked for third party on the GameCube and the royalties part of Nintendo's business but meant a lot better reach for first party titles than if the machine had a higher price and made shoppers think harder about how much they wanted another machine for those few titles. Nintendo has a chance to do it over again but fill in some of areas they failed at last time. They have zero chance of taking the #1 position again but they can revive their console business without that.[/QUOTE]

You continue to spin further away from the original idea. You keep using Sony, M$, Europe and French-Canada as your prime examples. But the original point was that Nintendo was going to try and get the Revolution to U.S. shores as close to a supposed earlier Japan launch as possible. It doesn't matter what others do. It is obvious that their business models are and always have been vastly different than Nintendo's. Other than the other companies, you state overwhelming need and interest as the reason for a huge game (like Zelda) to have the resources allocated needed to have a worldwide launch. Wouldn't the Revolution (and it's launch titles - one of which is Zelda) have the same or more interest? The answer is undoubtedly, "Yes!" I never said it wouldn't be hard, but no other company has shown a history of such a devotion to the foreign market (U.S. - or Japan in M$'s case) as has Nintendo. The point being, such a large lead time has become anything but routine - to Nintendo only, especially to their life-blood giving products and franchises.

And it does matter about the lead time in relation to the other consoles. Just like the DS vs. PSP claims (from both companies) that they do not look to compete with each other, it is inevitable that they do in the end. And Iwata has even acknowledged that fact with the Revolution. Look at the interview I posted a couple of posts up. He says that they will not necessarily be earlier than Sony, but they cannot afford to be too late this time. Timing is essential. And no other videogames company has had either as many successes nor failures on timing (or many other factors) as has Nintendo. They understand this fact and are going to take advantage of timing to the best of their ability.
 
A Nintendo rep has been quoted as saying the company will not try to compete graphically with the PS3 and XBox 360.

That's why I say it's weaker than pixie and dixie cartoons.
 
[quote name='The Truth']A Nintendo rep has been quoted as saying the company will not try to compete graphically with the PS3 and XBox 360.

That's why I say it's weaker than pixie and dixie cartoons.[/QUOTE]

Where's the quote? They have said that about horsepower, but not graphics. As far as graphics go, Iwata actually said in the pre-E3 conference that you will see them and say, "Wow!" You can do a lot these days with a powerful machine and you can't do too much more with a super-powerful machine. We are at a virtual cap on processing power and graphical output at this point in history until some new boom in technology happens. A lot of highend chips right now are a waste of money, since the numbers work nice on a calculator, but don't have much to do with reality.

Unless you have something useful to say, stop your trolling.
 
I never said it was going to be a year after 360, I stated, they will release in japan first...the gamecube was out roughly 3 months earlier in japan...IMO if the revolution is released in japan in march (that is the speculation of sony's date in japan)...and they went to jump the gun on sony, 3 months later (going by their past with the gamecube) will be june, it would be better to push it back into the holiday season with more disposable income...but if they are going after the younger audience, maybe a summer release would be a good thing...if it is pushed back to the fall, then it would be roughly 1 year later then the xbox 360, but in theory, nintendo and sony will not have a years advance in technology...my only point was to show the misconception of statements that xbox 360 will be a year older, something that has been posted on numerous threads on a variety of gaming message boards...Don't get so angry, even know the majority of nintendo games don't appeal to me, their are some gems that I will need to get and be purchasing a revolution
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']Where's the quote? They have said that about horsepower, but not graphics. As far as graphics go, Iwata actually said in the pre-E3 conference that you will see them and say, "Wow!" You can do a lot these days with a powerful machine and you can't do too much more with a super-powerful machine. We are at a virtual cap on processing power and graphical output at this point in history until some new boom in technology happens. A lot of highend chips right now are a waste of money, since the numbers work nice on a calculator, but don't have much to do with reality.

Unless you have something useful to say, stop your trolling.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense. Horsepower translates directly to graphic ability. The stillshots may look no different but the interactive result would be very different. Think about the anticipated deficiencies in the PS2 port of RE4 and try to make the same claim from Sony's perspective.

There may be more work needed to fully exploit the capabilities but so what? The same can be said about many creative endeavors. There is a huge difference between a paper tablet with some sticks of charcoal and the ceiling of a large chapel to be painted with the full palette of available color but the result only becomes meaningful when talent and effort are brought to bear on the environement with greater potential.

Another consideration that a more powerful system makes it easy to make the results achieved only with great effort on a lesser machine. A team might struggles for weeks tuning their engine and making adjustments to get a complex scene to work smoothly. Given a system with more overhead capacity the same scene would have been completed in days rather than weeks. It may not be fully tapping the power of that machine but if it gets results in a fast and economical fashion, that is a big win.

Middleware like Unreal Engine 3 is getting tremendous attention because it enables smaller companies to buy the labor and expertise that went into the engine for a small fraction of what it would cost to produce something comparable. You can find parallels to that in just about every industry.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Because you canna change the laws of physics, Captain!

Nintendo has indicated what the physical size of the unit will be and everything follows from there. We know it will contain a DVD drive, likely a slot loader similar to those used in Apple notebooks. That consumes several cubic inches of the interior right there. There will also be a pair of wireless hosts, one for networking and one for controllers. This will be at least one separate chip from the CPU and AV sections. Wireless isn't something that gets integrated in system processors due to potential ugliness with mixing analog with noisy digital logic.

So we're left with an awfully tight package. From Nintendo's description the entire thing will be smaller than just the cooling solution in the Xbox 360. (Likewise for the PS3 but we haven't been shown the interior of that yet.) This means the Revolution system board has to be very small and run extremely cool. Unless Nintendo is is going to have you store this thing in your refrigerator the size puts some severe limitations on the processing capacity. We know Nintendo is getting thei CPU and video chips from the same two vendors supplying those functions to the Xbox 360.

Shipping late next year may offer access to a smaller process level (65nm) than used for the 360 chips (90nm) but that won't come anywhere remotely close to allowing a comparable chipset in that tiny space. Ergo, it is unavoidable the Revolution chipset will occupy a lot less transistor real estate and correspondingly possess much less horsepower and functionality. There is no avoiding it.[/QUOTE]

That is, if what they showed at E3 is the whole system and not just part of it.

Maybe that's not realistic, but a Nintendo fan can dream, yeah?
 
Here's a question...if it's a slot loader and supposedly backward compatible, will it need some kind of adapter ring for GameCube discs? Is that even possible?
 
[quote name='MorPhiend']You continue to spin further away from the original idea. You keep using Sony, M$, Europe and French-Canada as your prime examples. But the original point was that Nintendo was going to try and get the Revolution to U.S. shores as close to a supposed earlier Japan launch as possible. It doesn't matter what others do. It is obvious that their business models are and always have been vastly different than Nintendo's. Other than the other companies, you state overwhelming need and interest as the reason for a huge game (like Zelda) to have the resources allocated needed to have a worldwide launch. Wouldn't the Revolution (and it's launch titles - one of which is Zelda) have the same or more interest? The answer is undoubtedly, "Yes!" I never said it wouldn't be hard, but no other company has shown a history of such a devotion to the foreign market (U.S. - or Japan in M$'s case) as has Nintendo. The point being, such a large lead time has become anything but routine - to Nintendo only, especially to their life-blood giving products and franchises.

And it does matter about the lead time in relation to the other consoles. Just like the DS vs. PSP claims (from both companies) that they do not look to compete with each other, it is inevitable that they do in the end. And Iwata has even acknowledged that fact with the Revolution. Look at the interview I posted a couple of posts up. He says that they will not necessarily be earlier than Sony, but they cannot afford to be too late this time. Timing is essential. And no other videogames company has had either as many successes nor failures on timing (or many other factors) as has Nintendo. They understand this fact and are going to take advantage of timing to the best of their ability.[/QUOTE]

The issues for a simultaneous software and the same for a hardware launch are differen, as I tried to convey. Software launches are not held up by physical supply. The capacity to manufacture discs far outstrips the market for them. Also, changing the product coming off the line on short notice isn't a problem with optical disc production.

For semiconductor hardware it's a different story. You do not want to become overinvested in manufacturing capacity greater than you anticpate needing on a month to month basis. Otherwise you end up with a lot of expensive idle capacity. Once you're set up to produce one chip it is expensive to change that. (This was one of the big problems with ROM carts.) In the case of the N64 Nintendo knew they'd have enough hardware because they also knew sales would be dropping off very rapidly due to a severe lack of worthwhile title after Mario 64. The ability to deliver inventory for the US soon after Japan was largely thanks to the lack of software.

If you're rooting for Nintendo, is this really desirable? Or would it be better that Japan absorb all of their capacity for at least one quarter before the launch enthusiasm goes down to a steady but manageable stream of sales? Sony didn't try for a near simultaneous launch because they believed, even before the chip supply issues, they wouldn't have any inventory to spare for a good long while. They were right, although that inventory cost them much more than they would have preferred.

Nintendo may pull off a near simultaneous launch but if they schedue such it wil be a warning to me of lackluster software choice until much later. Last time around there wasn't even the equivalent of MArio 64 to justify early adoption. I would hold out extremely little hope for a Zelda game at launch. That would be a first in all Nintendo history. People will have to settle for Mario and hope it's better than Sunshine.
 
[quote name='WhipSmartBanky']Here's a question...if it's a slot loader and supposedly backward compatible, will it need some kind of adapter ring for GameCube discs? Is that even possible?[/QUOTE]

Such things exist but would be a disaster waitng to happen for Nintendo. How long do you think a console would go before someone stuck a GameCube disc in the slot without considering whether an adapter ring is needed?

Nintendo would either need a mechanism that handles the smaller discs without any user intervention or not use a slot loader. Remember, they said the final unit would be a fair bit smaller and made no guaranteed that it would have anything in common cosmetically with what was shown. At this point we have no idea what the final product will be other than some dimensions and a DVD drive that can also accept GameCube discs. There is no assurance a slot loading drive is part of the final spec.

Nintendo will show what their next console actualy is when the moment suits them. Any overlap with the timing of the Xbox 360 launch or further disclosure by Sony of PS3 details like price will be purely coincidental. Really.
 
[quote name='AdamInPlaidum']That is, if what they showed at E3 is the whole system and not just part of it.

Maybe that's not realistic, but a Nintendo fan can dream, yeah?[/QUOTE]

They flat out said the box with the glowy slot and no other functionality shown at E3 was not the final form factor and that would be even smaller. They're talking about a package smaller than what the Xbox 360 and PS3 need just to cool their chipsets. Unless Nintendo is going to have a very expensive cooling solution the Revolution chipset will by necessity be of much lesser capability. What would be the point of having the most expensive product just to make it small? It isn't a portable.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Nonsense. Horsepower translates directly to graphic ability.

Another consideration that a more powerful system makes it easy to make the results achieved only with great effort on a lesser machine. A team might struggles for weeks tuning their engine and making adjustments to get a complex scene to work smoothly. Given a system with more overhead capacity the same scene would have been completed in days rather than weeks. It may not be fully tapping the power of that machine but if it gets results in a fast and economical fashion, that is a big win.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='epobirs']The issues for a simultaneous software and the same for a hardware launch are differen, as I tried to convey. Software launches are not held up by physical supply. The capacity to manufacture discs far outstrips the market for them. Also, changing the product coming off the line on short notice isn't a problem with optical disc production.

For semiconductor hardware it's a different story. You do not want to become overinvested in manufacturing capacity greater than you anticpate needing on a month to month basis. Otherwise you end up with a lot of expensive idle capacity. Once you're set up to produce one chip it is expensive to change that. (This was one of the big problems with ROM carts.) In the case of the N64 Nintendo knew they'd have enough hardware because they also knew sales would be dropping off very rapidly due to a severe lack of worthwhile title after Mario 64. The ability to deliver inventory for the US soon after Japan was largely thanks to the lack of software.

If you're rooting for Nintendo, is this really desirable? Or would it be better that Japan absorb all of their capacity for at least one quarter before the launch enthusiasm goes down to a steady but manageable stream of sales? Sony didn't try for a near simultaneous launch because they believed, even before the chip supply issues, they wouldn't have any inventory to spare for a good long while. They were right, although that inventory cost them much more than they would have preferred.

Nintendo may pull off a near simultaneous launch but if they schedue such it wil be a warning to me of lackluster software choice until much later. Last time around there wasn't even the equivalent of MArio 64 to justify early adoption. I would hold out extremely little hope for a Zelda game at launch. That would be a first in all Nintendo history. People will have to settle for Mario and hope it's better than Sunshine.[/QUOTE]


Nonsense. Technology changes. (Just playing with you.) And so do ways to utilize such technology. Check out my explanation of the patent I posted (cheap plug ;) ).

And like I said before, power is not everything these days. We are pushing a cap on what processors can push and need to find a way around that for the time being.

And why does there have to be a shortage? If you are using a cheap solution for the innards and have found a way to simultaneously keep up with graphics, why hold back production? The price of cheap technology does not drop quickly, no need to manufacture a shortage...

Oh, and here's the thread of the patent:

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52806
 
There's a limit to what anyone compnay can produce in a month. You could ask "why dont they just make 7 million systems first and THEN release the system?" Because all those systems cost money and they have get people to order them to pay for making more systems to eventually get that high a number of units.

I forget where I read it, either IGN or Gamespot where they said the Revo will have a way to automatically sense what kind of disk you're using and position it perfectly for reading the data so who knows if they've done it already or not.

Horsepower = potential. Everyone of these systems is capable of producing turds if the game maker dosent try. By that same token the level of graphical quality can hit a ceiling on a lesser system while there's still room to manuver on a stronger system. This isn't to say that there's anything wrong with the quality of the graphics achieved on the GC in comparison to the other systems this generation. But the logical belief is that the Revo is not being developed to be a hardcore graphical power house beyond the current high standard of today's graphics where as the other two are specifically trying to blow the doors off the standard for the next generation.
 
[quote name='WhipSmartBanky']Here's a question...if it's a slot loader and supposedly backward compatible, will it need some kind of adapter ring for GameCube discs? Is that even possible?[/QUOTE]The E3 review I read said the slot can handle any size disc. It doesn't care if it's a GC disc, a Revolution disc, or a DVD. It must be designed similar to a record player where it grabs the center hole... and so the size doesn't matter. My CD Player works the same way (can play either 5" or 3" discs).




What I'm wondering: How am I supposed to play my NES/SNES/N64 games?

Is there a cartridge slot???

troy
 
[quote name='electrictroy']What I'm wondering: How am I supposed to play my NES/SNES/N64 games?

Is there a cartridge slot???

troy[/QUOTE]

You download them.
 
Download. And pay a pretty penny too. Like the Gameboy ports, it will probably cost $30 for a game I already bought 10 years ago. :whistle2:(

I'd prefer that they burn all the NES/SNES/N64 roms onto a Revolution disc, charge $100 for it, and then let me *own* those roms forever, rather than rent them. I don't like rebuying the same game over-and-over-and-over.



Also, what about the NON-nintendo games, like Banjo-Kazooie? Will they be available?

troy
 
They're charging that for old games on GBA or what have you because they had to port the code over, put it on a cart and redistribute it. I'm sure they know if they charge $30 per game for a download that the idea will crash and burn.

What they're talking about for revolution seems to be an iTunes-esque download service for old nintendo games. I'm guessing they will play through an emulator of some sort built into the system software, but nintendo hasn't revealed everything. As such, we'll have to wait and see :)
 
Honestly, will the specs of "3x the power of gamecube" (or whatever it was) stop any of you from buying Nintendo's next console? I'm pretty sure many of you have decided already.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']I don't like rebuying the same game over-and-over-and-over.[/QUOTE]


yeah but Nintendo does.... their back catalog is basically a license to print money...
 
[quote name='Robobandit']What they're talking about for revolution seems to be an iTunes-esque download service for old nintendo games. [/QUOTE]
Itunes = $1 a song. I could handle paying a dollar for classics like Mario RPG and Final Fantasy 6 (3-u.s.).

Hmmm.

I think Nintendo just sold a Revolution! ;-) I *love* those old classic games. To answer someone else's question - Yeah I'll buy it, as soon as the price drops below $200. I never pay full price for anything.

troy
 
funny you should mention itunes.

what if nintendos next gan gameboy can connect to the revolution and load classic games onto it? (ala ipod)

what if indeed.
 
[quote name='punqsux']funny you should mention itunes.

what if nintendos next gan gameboy can connect to the revolution and load classic games onto it? (ala ipod)

what if indeed.[/QUOTE]

Now that would be sweet. I've been waiting for the PSP to play SNES games off of the memory card - that would be even better...
 
[quote name='punqsux']funny you should mention itunes.

what if nintendos next gan gameboy can connect to the revolution and load classic games onto it? (ala ipod)

what if indeed.[/QUOTE]

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Now, that is a nice idea! I have not even thought of that one. Oh boy. I'm excited at just the thought...:hot: :drool:

If this happens, you are my hero (even though you would have had absolutely nothing to do with it actually haooening... *shrug*)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top