Moor-Angol
Banned
I wish May 9 will come soon...
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Nintendo Revolution Confusions
- Thread starter Nightbringer
- Start date
MrSardonic
The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
Nightbringer said:
wtf? I'm not paying for online, I thought the whole point was it was going to be free. Since when did information come out saying it would be a subscription service?
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
MrSardonic said:
I work every saturday in a videogame shop and the commisions that we receive for every console sold are around 10-12.
The idea of selling the console for 14.95 and requiring a subscription service for activate it could improve the sales of the system beyond the imaginable.
MrSardonic
The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
oh i see, you subscribe to the console as well. If I'd have to pay $180 a year to keep a console working....fuck that. Oh, and commiserations on your job
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
MrSardonic said:
Yes, make to pay 14.95$ every month until the last year of the console is an abuse, but if we reduce it at one year (or a semester) only the idea takes different perception.
With a console with a cost of 400$ they cannot do this, but with a console with a cost of 99$ they can do it
Suburban Cowboy
Member
those prices seem like bullshit to me
I cant imagine they actually expect people to pay 20$ for n64 games. Also, I's bet money (or perhaps an n64 download) that they will not charge for online. Certainly not 15$ a month.
I cant imagine they actually expect people to pay 20$ for n64 games. Also, I's bet money (or perhaps an n64 download) that they will not charge for online. Certainly not 15$ a month.
AndoCalrissian
Member
Yeah, that would be the case if Nintendo had ever announced any sort of pricing plan for the virtual console. The original post has this entirely wrong, nothing's been announced.Oblivion said:
GitarooMan
Member
Moor-Angol said:
No kidding.
Nightbringer said:
No, he said that Zelda:TP looks as good as some of the next gen games released so far.
Oh, and for the VC, I remember reading about Iwata/Miyamoto saying that they will utilize a points system for the d/l of games. Prepaid cards in various points denominations most likely.
Of All Trades
Member
Except he said it before they were released.Spike said:
Nightbringer said:
Wrong. The GCN memory set-up was like this:
-24MB 1T-SRAM (2 chips)
-16MB A-Memory (1 chip)
-CPU on-chip memory (2MB?)
-GPU on-chip memory (3MB?)
There's reasons for breaking chips down into chunks like this. Seperating them into chunks helps dispensate heat (something that's important for smaller case designs). Buying smaller chips in bulk ammounts sometimes makes them cheaper. In special memory types (1T-SRAM for example) smaller capacity chips may be a requirement for their design or manufacturing processes.
From this I believe the Revolution's memory set-up will be like this (going by the IGN spec article):
-GCN set-up:
--24MB 1T-SRAM (may be 1 or 2 chips)
--1 chip 16MB A-Memory (1 chip)
-64MB 1T-SRAM (2 chips of 32MB each or 4 chips of 16MB each (or another combination of more chips depending on the overall system architecture/motherboard real-estate))
-CPU on-chip memory (?MB)
-GPU on-chip memory (3MB...I don't believe this part of the IGN article, why up all the specs/memory except this???)
And why? For the reasons above and, I believe, so that the system can run in a "low-power" mode when either emulating VC games or simply GCN BC. In this "low-power" mode the Revolution could be more viable as a portable/mobile system. Slap a battery/LCD on that and it makes sense to include the old GCN set-up for a "low-power" mode so the battery can last longer.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
DrGAKMAN said:
CPU one is wrong. Gekko has 48KB of L1 cache and 256KB of L2 cache.
The thing that confuses me ifs the supposed 88MB of 1T-SRAM count... This forces like you said, a 8+16 (24) and a 32+32 situation. It would have been much more economical to go with a 32+32+32 set up leaving you with 96MB of 1T-SRAM (or even a 32+64 set up). Hell, I'd much rather go with taking a 32MB chip and disabling/ignoring 8MB portion of it to get to 24+64 than going with 2 chips (8+16) to get to 24MB.... Less clutter on the mobo the better.
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
The problem is that we don´t know if IGN is lying or not, Nintendo hasn´t said nothing but at the same time we can say that Nintendo hasn´t said nothing about all fakes.
I never believed the IGN specs and this post is big trap that has take full effect.
I never believed the IGN specs and this post is big trap that has take full effect.
Danthrax said:
Well, I was the guy who conducted that interview (/me takes a bow
) and followed up on the question when I met Merrick at NoE for the Nintendo Gamer's Summit (you know, the Mario Kart DS online event). He then clarified that while Nintendo will probably never publish technical specifications, third party developers of course know them, and can reveal them after their NDAs expire (which will probably be at E3 at the earliest, launchday at the latest). So it is in fact pretty likely that we will get the specs, someday. Personally I couldn't care less, as I just want to see the games, but the techheads should be satisfied with that answer. Zerodoppler
Member
Piepz said:
It's $15 per month to play as many Virtual Console games you want. The service itself will [most likely] be free.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
Nightbringer said:
Why would IGN "lie"? I can see them being misinformed, but lying?
I think they got some credible info from their usual source and went with it. How accurate the info ultimately turns out to be, who the hell knows, but as far as IGN knows, it would be credible enough info to print.
MaddenNFL64
Member
The biggest deal there is the memory. A Xbox+1 level GPU is pretty good, and 1ghz CPU is too, but the devs are gonna really bitch at the memory. I hope they make the 1T-SRAM at least 128.
All in all though, the Rev will be capable enough. Graphics heavy ports would have to be downgraded obviously, but it may be like the PC to Xbox conversions (smaller maps, longer load times, degraded textures etc.). Also, i'm hoping the games ported to Rev don't just use the revmote shell. FPS developers should put in the time to utilize the revmote, and all of them should add some sort of functionality.
All in all though, the Rev will be capable enough. Graphics heavy ports would have to be downgraded obviously, but it may be like the PC to Xbox conversions (smaller maps, longer load times, degraded textures etc.). Also, i'm hoping the games ported to Rev don't just use the revmote shell. FPS developers should put in the time to utilize the revmote, and all of them should add some sort of functionality.
Shogmaster said:
Thanks for replying. I put a questionmark by the GCN's CPU on-chip memory 'cos I didn't have a chance to look up the info...which seems to be less than 1/2MB.
Actually, I was suggesting more of a 12MB + 12MB for the GCN's 24MB (like it was on the GCN's motherboard). As for the extra 64MB it might be more likely to set-it up in a 16+16+16+16 fashion. Remember, these are going to be custom chips, on a larger footprint than the GCN's motherboard and heat dispensation will be a big factor since the system is so small.
I gave my reasons for why they might be doing this...so as to have a "low-power" mode inwhere the system runs using less power so it could more viable as a portable VC/GCN. Basically the 64MB of extra memory could be "turned off" leaving the GCN's 24MB (1T-SRAM) + 16MB (A Memory) to run GCN BC or VC games. Also, having a 32+32+32 set-up might mess up GCN BC since the GCN only needed 24MB of 1T-SRAM, not 32MB.
MaddenNFL64 said:
Since Nintendo is only aiming for SDTV resolutions, I think this "beefed up GCN" approach makes sense. I think the development community will approach Revolution games (the control interface aside) like a current generation system without limitations...and since there's going to be games continuing to flow to PS2/PSP, the Revolution won't be seen as a waste of time since they can take those projects and beef them up for the platform.
Approaching it from a next-generation standpoint will be harder, but I imagine memory won't be so limitting since alot of memory in next generation games will be used for higher definition detail. Again, since Revolution isn't HiDef, I don't think the memory will be a major issue.
The only thing, again, I see wrong with IGN's spec article is saying that everything (the memory, the CPU & GPU) will all be "beefed up" iterations of their GCN counterparts *except* the Hollywood's on-chip memory which will reamin the same as Flipper's on-chip memory. This makes no sense since: 1) this would be a big bottleneck that would hold back the system and could easily be fixed & 2) IGN even admits that the GPU is the biggest mystery in the specs YET they somehow know it's only going to have 3MB of on-chip memory?
Newzboyz99
Losers! My wife has me on lock!
knowing very little about tech specs, looking at those projected specs for Rev compared to Xbox 360 and PS3...how can Rev NOT be $150 or less. I mean its no comparison. 
MaddenNFL64
Member
It'll probably be $150, maybe $199 if Nintendo gets the greed itch.
AndoCalrissian
Member
THERE HAS BEEN NO PRICING ANNOUNCED.Zerodoppler said:
I can see them doing a little bit of both. They get a little bit of credible information and then they fill in the blanks with BS. They jump to conclussions on several occasions, but it gives them attention and hits.Shogmaster said:
The $15 a month or $20 for N64 downloads seems to come from IGN's insistance that XBLA games will be going up to those prices and higher. It came across to me to be more speculation than anything... at least they're trying to be consistant.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
The Revolution will be $100 less than PS3. I guarantee it. Nintendo wants the price advantage and in their Japanese offices, I doubt they even consider the Xbox 360 as worthy competition. So they probably won't care if the Xbox 360 costs as much as the Revolution. When Reggie says less than $300, its $299. Every fucking person who says its less than a <price point here> is cheaper by one penny. It always has been and I'm curious why morons on this board can't figure it out. If its cheaper by more than a penny, it will be the first time thats ever happened in the history of PR. The only chance it has at being $250 is if PS3 will be $350, or the Revolution will be $200 if PS3 will be $300. Its a guarantee. The Revolution's pricing will not be affected by the Xbox 360.
Nintendo doesn't make cheap software either. They never have. Nintendo's profits on consoles come from the games, the razor and blade pack strategy. Zelda TP will be $59 for the Limited Edition. I expect major Revolution titles to be $59, budget Revolution titles to be $49, and Player's Choice titles to be $39. Nintendo can claim that they sold millions of N64 cartridges at these price points...and they'd be right. They can play up the cheap software angle with the Virtual Console or the Game Cube BC. I wouldn't be shocked if Nintendo drops the MSRP on the GC titles by $10. They can advertise that you can get brand new GC titles now for $40 and get the Player's Choice titles for $20 to aim at the wallet of cheap gamers.
For virtual consoles, I expect it to be $4.99 for NES, $9.99 for SNES, and $14.99 or $19.99 for N64. I also expect some kind of service where you can get the games without going online for them. Although it will probably be limited, I could see having kiosks at certain locations where you can download the games onto separate SD flash cards...and transfer it to the main flash memory inside the system. Nintendo will be more confident about the online gaming but I don't think they want to count out the offline gamers. They will probably sell "game cards" either at stores or Nintendo.com where you can download credit onto a card to use to download the games. I don't think its going to be a straight up charge. Retailers will jump on it too since there's a chance of profit on their end. There's probably a subscription up where its $20 for unlimited NES per month, $40 for SNES, and $50 for N64. Something like that, where you can download all the NES games you want. I could also see Nintendo setting up a $0.99/$1.49/$2.49 "Try before you buy" offer for one time play for a limited time.
Just my guesses. I hope everything is cheaper than it is since Revolution is the only console I want to get but Nintendo doesn't make cheap software so I don't expect anything in terms of good software deals. I expect Nintendo to try to profit off of the hardware but keep it $100 less than the PS3.
Nintendo doesn't make cheap software either. They never have. Nintendo's profits on consoles come from the games, the razor and blade pack strategy. Zelda TP will be $59 for the Limited Edition. I expect major Revolution titles to be $59, budget Revolution titles to be $49, and Player's Choice titles to be $39. Nintendo can claim that they sold millions of N64 cartridges at these price points...and they'd be right. They can play up the cheap software angle with the Virtual Console or the Game Cube BC. I wouldn't be shocked if Nintendo drops the MSRP on the GC titles by $10. They can advertise that you can get brand new GC titles now for $40 and get the Player's Choice titles for $20 to aim at the wallet of cheap gamers.
For virtual consoles, I expect it to be $4.99 for NES, $9.99 for SNES, and $14.99 or $19.99 for N64. I also expect some kind of service where you can get the games without going online for them. Although it will probably be limited, I could see having kiosks at certain locations where you can download the games onto separate SD flash cards...and transfer it to the main flash memory inside the system. Nintendo will be more confident about the online gaming but I don't think they want to count out the offline gamers. They will probably sell "game cards" either at stores or Nintendo.com where you can download credit onto a card to use to download the games. I don't think its going to be a straight up charge. Retailers will jump on it too since there's a chance of profit on their end. There's probably a subscription up where its $20 for unlimited NES per month, $40 for SNES, and $50 for N64. Something like that, where you can download all the NES games you want. I could also see Nintendo setting up a $0.99/$1.49/$2.49 "Try before you buy" offer for one time play for a limited time.
Just my guesses. I hope everything is cheaper than it is since Revolution is the only console I want to get but Nintendo doesn't make cheap software so I don't expect anything in terms of good software deals. I expect Nintendo to try to profit off of the hardware but keep it $100 less than the PS3.
LegendofJoe
Member
Wouldn't it be hilarious/brilliant if Nintendo somehow managed to pull a bait and switch on the entire industry? As in the Revolution case that was shown at E3 is in no way indicative of the final box and the specifications thus far released are a far cry from the actual specs.
I seriously, serously doubt this is the case, but I know you guys are aware of the chaos this would cause over the Internet. Every other Internet event would pale in comparison, it would be priceless; and for that reason alone I would loooove to see it happen.
I seriously, serously doubt this is the case, but I know you guys are aware of the chaos this would cause over the Internet. Every other Internet event would pale in comparison, it would be priceless; and for that reason alone I would loooove to see it happen.
IAmtheFMan
Member
LegendofJoe said:
If they still priced it at 150-250 or so, yes. It'd be absolutely hilarious. If it wasn't and was priced at PS3/360 prices, then no. It'd be the GC 2, i.e Nintendo trying to play Sony's game instead of their own, which backfired this gen.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
DrGAKMAN said:
Yeah, I was sure about the L2 cache, but I had to look up the L1 cache info myself.
12MB (96mb) is not likely since memory chips are usually made in increments of 32, 64, 128, 256, 512mb modules. That's why GC's 24MB of 1T-SRAM came with a 64mb (8MB) and a 128mb (16MB) modules.
Rev doesn't run on batteries. "Low power" mode is rather unnecessary.
ThunderEmperor
Banned
also reggie stated that the rev will be able to receive ports from the other systemMrbob said:
ThunderEmperor said:
That's PR speak though, it doesn't say anything about how close to the original the port would be. He could have just been referring to the classic controller shell.
It is a complete mystery until they show us media. Personally as long as the image-quality is good I'll be happy. If we lose the need for the GC's 16-bit colour stuff, and throw in some better AA or even a down-sampled display, then that will be fine.
I just don't want my eyes poked out.
krypt0nian
Banned
krypt0nian
Banned
Speevy said:
Sgt. Killjoy
Member
OH GOD THAT WOULD BE AWESOME
Netrunner2k2
Member
:lol :lol
OG_Original Gamer
Member
krypt0nian said:
Looks professional, more than likely, its bull.
Azure Dream
Member
I wouldn't recommend that logo even if it was real... I'm not that immature, and even _I_ see a willy in it... 
And the Master Sword/Shield thing is awesome in thought, but probably fake... and it would have the same motion-tracking as the revmote? Both not requiring the pointing sensor be uncovered? While I know Nintendo said the revmote doesn't need to be pointing at the sensors/screen to still track movement and such, that still seems like a bit much.
But damn, if that was real... if Capcom made a Mega Buster shell you could slide the revmote into...
And the Master Sword/Shield thing is awesome in thought, but probably fake... and it would have the same motion-tracking as the revmote? Both not requiring the pointing sensor be uncovered? While I know Nintendo said the revmote doesn't need to be pointing at the sensors/screen to still track movement and such, that still seems like a bit much.
But damn, if that was real... if Capcom made a Mega Buster shell you could slide the revmote into...
Hydro_Alexis
Banned
krypt0nian said:
No just no every geeks dream i swear.
SantaC
Member
krypt0nian said:
bullshit. an IGN board member did it.
krypt0nian
Banned
SantaCruZer said:
The bullshit or comment was for the PLUS website. I know the controller's fake.