Support NeoGAF

[Polari]

It's clear that Nintendo couldn't have continued with the technology race. The competition was too strong, and releasing Gamecube 2 wouldn't have halted their marketshare's downward trend. So they're taking a different path - it really is their only option.

That said, I'm disappointed they've been so stingy on the specs. When you consider how poorly 104MBs of RAM looks now, think how much worse it will look in 2011.

 

[mrklaw]

It's clear that Nintendo couldn't have continued with the technology race. The competition was too strong, and releasing Gamecube 2 wouldn't have halted their marketshare's downward trend. So they're taking a different path - it really is their only option.

That said, I'm disappointed they've been so stingy on the specs. When you consider how poorly 104MBs of RAM looks now, think how much worse it will look in 2011.

agreed.

I'm kind of OK with the tangent Nintendo are taking.

But only 64MB more memory is disappointing, even taking into account non-HD. Thats only an Xbox1 more memory.

 

[Version 3.0]

It's clear that Nintendo couldn't have continued with the technology race. The competition was too strong, and releasing Gamecube 2 wouldn't have halted their marketshare's downward trend. So they're taking a different path - it really is their only option.

That said, I'm disappointed they've been so stingy on the specs. When you consider how poorly 104MBs of RAM looks now, think how much worse it will look in 2011.

There's no reason they couldn't compete. They're sitting on a TON of cash, no liabilities, they consistently make 'way more money than their competition, and they've always released a very powerful machine in the past. They could have easily released a powerful console now AND had the new interface.
They CHOSE not to, they weren't forced out. Now they're taking two gambles instead of one--weird controller that might be too gimmicky, and 5-year-old tech. I think they've just doubled their chances of getting burned. And I almost hope they do.

 

[borghe]

It's clear that Nintendo couldn't have continued with the technology race. The competition was too strong, and releasing Gamecube 2 wouldn't have halted their marketshare's downward trend. So they're taking a different path - it really is their only option.

I don't think they couldn't have. they do have $8B in the bank. but I do think it no longer appealed to them. with the money MS and Sony are sinking into next-gen, it becomes very apparent that they want, no.... NEED to take over your living room as well. I fully expect online music and movie services to follow sometime early this gen. Nintendo has said for a while now that those areas don't interest them (hell, I still expect Rev to not be able to play DVDs). they want to make game machines. They have actually been saying this for over a gen now, and Rev is a clear example of that.

as for games looking ugly as hell by 2011, a) I don't think they will. hell, I don't think top PC games 5-7 years old look ugly as hell.. as long as you have filtering, anti-aliasing, and decent textures, and 60fps most 3D games will look decent for a while to come (see diminishing returns on graphics for more info). b) even if the games aren't new and shiny anymore, with decent gameplay it won't matter. and if revmote is taken full advantage of and not copied well, you won't be able to get that experience anywhere else.

 

[soundwave05]

I think Nintendo is just fed up trying to convince people to buy their hardware. It takes so much time/energy/marketing money to do so ... they just want to get their system in people's homes (regardless of if they have a PS3 or 360 already).

The point after all is not to sell hardware, but to sell the games ... hardware was actually getting in Nintendo's way. People don't want a traditional Nintendo console anymore (by and large). That's stopping them from playing Mario/Zelda.

If its so ridiculously cheap, even the most jaded person will probably pick one up provided the games are cool and different enough from the norm.

Nintendo's basically made the hardware a non-factor ... hell at some point I wouldn't shocked if Nintendo runs a promotion where you get the console for free if you buy 2-3 games.

 

[Ristamar]

Nintendo has said for a while now that those areas don't interest them (hell, I still expect Rev to not be able to play DVDs). they want to make game machines. They have actually been saying this for over a gen now, and Rev is a clear example of that.

I agree, out of the box, I highly doubt it will play DVDs. I believe Merrick or Fils-Aime mentioned a plan to release a remote/dongle that would allow/enable DVD playback, though.

 

[Forgotten Ancient]

There's no reason they couldn't compete. They're sitting on a TON of cash, no liabilities, they consistently make 'way more money than their competition, and they've always released a very powerful machine in the past. They could have easily released a powerful console now AND had the new interface.
They CHOSE not to, they weren't forced out. Now they're taking two gambles instead of one--weird controller that might be too gimmicky, and 5-year-old tech. I think they've just doubled their chances of getting burned. And I almost hope they do.

If Nintendo were to release a console that's on par with the PS3, they'd be taking a much bigger liability than I think they can afford. Considering the drive and processor of the PS3 are both partially Sony-made (Cell, Blu-Ray), they get both "cheaper" than what Nintendo could - especially in the long run. Sony's aiming to lose (depending on the price) a good $100-200 per system sold. Microsoft as well. Without other revenue streams, Nintendo can't bleed it's way to the top as their competitors can.

I'd be wearing blinders if I said I didn't wish the Revolution was more powerful, but I certainly understand where they're coming from. At least I know I'll be able to afford all three consoles now, where before I was thinking I'd have to pick 2 outta 3.

 

[stone128]

 

[Pachinko]

Ultimatly as with the gamecube , consumers will decide wether it's worth buying a gamecube turbo for their living room or not. Even if it comes out at 150 USD alongside a 400 USD ps3 and a 300USD 360 , people are still going to pass on it I think, becuase now you have the proven getting what youpay for mentality in the consumer mind. They see the PS3 at 400 dollars and know the last playstation was worthwhile and figure it must be the best becuase its the most expensive, but not quite ridiculously expensive(say 3DO back in the day). You know, I likened the revolution to the DS becuase of its controller, I thought of it as being just like the stylus. The system looks to be like the DS in more ways, becuase it'll cost half as much money, practically be a previous gen system when it comes out and the most important thing for nintendo- it'll likely make money right out of the gate for them. I mean what's a gamecube set them back these days? 70 bucks maybe? if even? A revolution will probally cost them 100 bucks. This is the game system people are going to buy to sit next to their 360 or PS3 , I don't think too many are going to purchase it by itself.

So in short, going by DS sales, specs may not matter at all, no matter how underpowered the thing actually is in the end. Wether portable success will translate to success at home is merely a waiting game.

 

[Doc Holliday]

So when do we start banning? If the rev were the PSP we would see mass bannings like never before.

 

[soundwave05]

The games will be the wildcard.

The games have to be wildly different, inventive, and fresh.

Nintendo has to be willing to rely less on their traditional game characters too. Utilize them when need be, but be smart about it, and make sure you've enough new content to appeal to people who don't care about Mario/Link/Samus or even Pikachu.

This coupled with the new controller, the Apple-ish design will create something so far removed from the GameCube in the public's eye.

 

[Ultra Magnanimous]

Y'know this tech is gonna be so cheap Nintendo could partner with a HD-DVD/Bluray player manufacturer (matsushita again?) and stick it in their box. Another Q?

 

[Y2Kev]

I hate the DS comparisons. It's all about perceived value to people.

People won't spend $250 dollars on a handheld device they perceive to have a limited role in such daily activity as commuting, etc. The DS is VERY fairly priced and it does currently have more titles that appeal to that sense of "on the go" gameplay. Sony is learning this the hard way, I think.

Don't apply DS logic to the home market. It's not the same.

 

[Polari]

There's no reason they couldn't compete. They're sitting on a TON of cash, no liabilities, they consistently make 'way more money than their competition, and they've always released a very powerful machine in the past. They could have easily released a powerful console now AND had the new interface.
They CHOSE not to, they weren't forced out. Now they're taking two gambles instead of one--weird controller that might be too gimmicky, and 5-year-old tech. I think they've just doubled their chances of getting burned. And I almost hope they do.

It would have been a far bigger risk to sink billions and billions into a new PS3-like console and when you consider their marketshare has fallen 4 generations on the trot, it would have been suicide.

There's no way Nintendo could win next-gen with a Gamecube 2. The competition is too strong, and have much more to lose than Nintendo. Not to mention that they've got leverage in terms of Windows connectivity with Microsoft and Blu-ray content with Sony and their motion picture subsidaries. It's no longer just about games, whereas Nintendo is.

 

[Vieo]

I always had a theory(I even made a post about it once) that as next-gen home consoles got more and more pricey, a market for a budget home gaming console would be created. Older consoles don't fill this gap because by the time they become cheap, their developer support has dwindled, the platforms have seen their best games already, and a lot of the games for it can't be found in stores. Handhelds wouldn't fill this gap either because they're handhelds and really don't offer the home console experience of playing on a big TV/display.

If Revo is cheaper in price for both hardware and games, I'll get to see my theory tested.

 

[jman2050]

This thread is going to be hilarious 2 years from now. Either way it goes.

 

[Gahiggidy]

Can someone please sumarize posts #1394 - #1673?

 

[Shogmaster]

$99 is definitely possible. And for the record, and I'll place bets here and now, $99 is 1000 times more likely than $199.

Ya fucked up son. I'll take that bet. What ya wanna wager?

 

[soundwave05]

$99 is possible, but I think Nintendo will start at $130 or $150 for the first Christmas. Maybe include a game with the system.

By 2006 we're talking about a *six year old* chipset for crissake. Yeah its a little souped up, but its not going to cost that much more. Going from 24MB of RAM to 88MB would've been a big cost difference 4 years ago ... today that's nothing.

The controller has to be relatively cheap to manufacture also for Nintendo to sell additional controllers at any reasonable price.

Stuff like the WiFi chip .... c'mon. It's probably the same WiFi chip in the DS.

 

[Version 3.0]

It would have been a far bigger risk to sink billions and billions into a new PS3-like console and when you consider their marketshare has fallen 4 generations on the trot, it would have been suicide.

There's no way Nintendo could win next-gen with a Gamecube 2. The competition is too strong, and have much more to lose than Nintendo. Not to mention that they've got leverage in terms of Windows connectivity with Microsoft and Blu-ray content with Sony and their motion picture subsidaries. It's no longer just about games, whereas Nintendo is.

Not so. Nintendo's always been on the conservative side when it comes to hardware cost, but also always had competitive machines. It's not the Gamecube's hardware that's at fault for losing marketshare this round--it's everything BUT that. And the Gamecube hardware, over the course of this gen, has made money.
But even if they didn't want to lose money on the hardware, there's a huge difference between even making a console that they can sell at cost without losses and this pathetically weak junk.
If the controller is the ace in the hole, then it would sell powerful hardware just as well as weak hardware. What advantage do they get from weak hardware? Cost. Which means what?

Either:
A) they're seriously afraid of losing money--which doesn't say much for their confidence in this product, specifically the controller. Especially when they're one of the most viable companies around, and they could have made a powerful console to sell at cost. They'd have to be afraid that they can't even recoup their development costs. That's pitiful.
B) they've become so greedy that they've decided hardware must not only NOT lose money, not just break even, but actually make money, even at launch.

Actually, I think it's both. They're cowardly and greedy. They've become Uncle Scrooge--fucking loaded and too cheap to buy a new car when you can coax a few more miles out of your old one.

 

[BigGreenMat]

I am terribly late to the party, but the specs are ludicrously low. Everyone who said they should have just released a dongle for Gamecube are right on. I don't see why I should buy completely new hardware when they are essentially just releasing a controller with specs like these.

 

[borghe]

Ya fucked up son. I'll take that bet. What ya wanna wager?

what are we betting? are you actually saying it will be $199?

leondexter - the entire basis for your post lies in believing that Nintendo is going to be raking in sick amounts of cash from the get go. This of course blows by the known numbers in what they spent on Hollywood and Broadway development, the minimum cost of hardware included (512MB flash, wifi, revmote, cpu and gpu, 1t-ram), etc. Not saying what you are saying is impossible, but given that regardless of how powerful the unit is, hardware-wise they are still starting from scratch, I guess I don't see this as nintendo sticking it to us (even though they already have with the GBM)

 

[soundwave05]

If Nintendo has a game in development right now that they feel has "Nintendogs" potential ... they should launch at $99.

Since yields are not an issue, Nintendo should be able to manufacture a ton of Rev systems if need be for next Christmas.

If there's no Nintendogs type game though, then there's no point to launch quite that low because are not going to buy that many systems initially anyway, so you might as well overcharge the Nintendo faithful.

Cold, hard business perspective, but there it is.

 

[dkeane]

what are we betting? are you actually saying it will be $199?

So you're both betting on specs released that are not official, and when Nintendo hasn't even formally announced all of the Revs capabilaties? You so crazy.

I'm not betting, but to release a console cheaper than they released the DS would be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

[Pikmindictator]

How do these "specs" compare to a mac mini?

 

[soundwave05]

So you're both betting on specs released that are not official, and when Nintendo hasn't even formally announced all of the Revs capabilaties? You so crazy.

I'm not betting, but to release a console cheaper than they released the DS would be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

DS will be $99 next year.

How's that really any different from GameCube being $99 while the GBA was $99 also? GBA is a SNES level system. The tech gap between the DS and Revolution is actually probably smaller than the one between GBA and GCN.

Rev is a budget console, accept it.

 

[Gahiggidy]

I think Nintendo needs to be a bit bolder in their advertising to get across the message of thier new product. THings like actually having A REAL PERSON pitching the product in thier ads. I.E., a Reggie or President Iwata talking directly to the consumers. Let them know they are taking a strong stance against exotic hardware that is priced out of range for most consumers. Let them know that what they really think the competition's obsession over technolgy and graphics. Let them know that a console-controller with 1996 technology is hardley "next-generation". Be dicks!

 

[borghe]

I'm not betting, but to release a console cheaper than they released the DS would be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

reread the post. I am not betting that it will be $99 outright. it would essentially be a bet where one says it will be $99 and one says it will be $199. I wouldn't make a single bet where it was either $99 or not. I believe it very well could be, but not to any degree of real confidence.

 

[soundwave05]

I think Nintendo needs to be a bit bolder in their advertising to get across the message of thier new product. THings like actually having A REAL PERSON pitching the product in thier ads. I.E., a Reggie or President Iwata talking directly to the consumers. Let them know they are taking a strong stance against exotic hardware that is priced out of range for most consumers. Let them know that what they really think the competition's obsession over technolgy and graphics. Let them know that a console-controller with 1996 technology is hardley "next-generation". Be dicks!

They have to advertise this thing in a dramatically different fashion.

More like a "lifestyle" device like how Apple, Gap, Nike advertise.

This is a stylish game device for the person with a busy life, friends, family ... someone who doesn't traditionally play video games ... that's how they gotta market it.

They cannot advertise it like a regular game console, nor IMO can they acknowledge the competition in their ads. Revolution has to be seen as something completely different.

They need some games too that are just completely different. Particularily software that can appeal to women. Brain Training is great also ... stuff like that just appeals to people who like to play Solataire or Tetris but hate regular games.

 

[koam]

I am terribly late to the party, but the specs are ludicrously low. Everyone who said they should have just released a dongle for Gamecube are right on. I don't see why I should buy completely new hardware when they are essentially just releasing a controller with specs like these.

It'll cost about as much as a Xbox360 wifi adapter does and it comes with built-in wifi so what's the problem?

 

[Shogmaster]

what are we betting? are you actually saying it will be $199?

I'm betting that the MSRP will be closer to $199 than $99 in the US at launch. If it's $149, then it's a wash. If it's $179 or $199, I get to come over anytime and fuck your sister. Nothing happens if I lose.

 

[borghe]

lol. ok, that's cool, though you'll have to negotiate with my sister yourself.

I am willing to bet that it won't go over $149. If I win you ship me a free PS3.

BET

 

[GDGF]

So what did I miss?:lol

Anyway, this isn't even really a surprise to those of us who have been following Nintendo's
(and specificly Iwata's Nintendo) recent strategy. I honestly think it's a good move. The final piece is the price. If it is indeed priced at 150 bucks (what I figure, anyway) Nintendo will move systems, period. My predictions, the system will sell like gangbusters in Japan and will be a close second to the PS3 (and depending on Nintendo's next moves, it could possibly do better than that) In the US and Europe, it won't match the numbers of the PS3, it could outsell the XboX 360 depending on whether that system gets Dreamcasted or not, but it's certainly going to outsell the Gamecube by far.

Worldwide, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Nintendo pull a strong second place to the PS3...and yes, you can save this post for prosperity.

 

[Version 3.0]

leondexter - I guess I don't see this as nintendo sticking it to us (even though they already have with the GBM)

Whether they're sticking it to us (financially speaking) depends on the price at retail. I'll bet you two things:

1. They don't sell it at or near cost, but instead make a tidy profit on it from the start.
2. They still don't allow retailers to make any profit from it.

I'd love to be wrong about either or both. It'd be the only possible silver lining in this cloud of shit.

 

[Shogmaster]

lol. ok, that's cool, though you'll have to negotiate with my sister yourself.

I am willing to bet that it won't go over $149. If I win you ship me a free PS3.

BET

I don't think your sister is pro enough to cover a $400 bet. *runs*

 

[soundwave05]

Iwata should be dragged out onto the streets and shot if Nintendo sells this thing for a penny over $149.99.

It's a GAMECUBE in a shiny new case. A GCN probably costs Nintendo less than $90 to make right now.

A new controller and a couple of TV sensors don't cost $80-$100 more.

There's no way any non-gamer will pay more than $150 for a game console (even that's stretching it *seriously*).

 

[borghe]

I don't think your sister is pro enough to cover a $400 bet. *runs*

:lol








wait a minute, that's my sister you're talking about.









:lol

 

[elostyle]

So since the rev is supposed to play dvds, wouldn't that account for at least 20$ in license fees alone?

 

[soundwave05]

So since the rev is supposed to play dvds, wouldn't that account for at least 20$ in license fees alone?

That's through a seperately sold dongle. So no, there are no licensing fees on the unit itself.

 

[borghe]

So since the rev is supposed to play dvds, wouldn't that account for at least 20$ in license fees alone?

who said anything about DVD playback? I think the general consensus is that it WON'T have playback.

and with $40 DVD players out there, I promise you the DVD playback license isn't anywhere near $20.

 

[soundwave05]

who said anything about DVD playback? I think the general consensus is that it WON'T have playback.

and with $40 DVD players out there, I promise you the DVD playback license isn't anywhere near $20.

Nintendo has officially stated the unit will play DVD movies with a dongle accessorie.

Could come in handy if Nintendo ever releases an LCD display for the system. Then you could throw it in your car and watch movies or play games.

 

[Cosmozone]

Uh, +20 pages since I left the thread yesterday.

Anyway, I've seen the specs now. I'm impressed with the targeted price point if it turns it to be true. I was willing to pay more, though, so that's bad for me. Guess I have to cut back on my graphical performance wish list a little. I'm still expecting decent textures and effects. Wonder how much reduced development costs helps in getting more games for the system.

I'm going for the $150 bet. Bundling it with a Revolution game is asking too much in my opinion, though. But it would be great to have a disc with a couple of mini games showing off the controller bundled with the console. A wand-enhanced version of a backlog title like Super Mario Land would also rock.

 

[soundwave05]

Uh, +20 pages since I left the thread yesterday.

Anyway, I've seen the specs now. I'm impressed with the targeted price point if it turns it to be true. I was willing to pay more, though, so that's bad for me. Guess I have to cut back on my graphical performance wish list a little. I'm still expecting decent textures and effects. Wonder how much reduced development costs helps in getting more games for the system.

I'm going for the $150 bet. Bundling it with a Revolution game is asking too much in my opinion, though. But it would be great to have a disc with a couple of mini games showing off the controller bundled with the console. A wand-enhanced version of a backlog title like Super Mario Land would also rock.

Depends on what type of game it is. Nintendo could easily bundle a more simplistic type of game that they developed on a low budget with the system.

 

[GDGF]

There's no way any non-gamer will pay more than $150 for a game console (even that's stretching it *seriously*).

QFT

150 has to be the price. Iwata knows that a low price is a must. We've got a previous example of his pricing/technology philosophy - the NDS. Nintendo launched at 150 (and was even prepared to launch at 99 bucks) The Revolution is the NDS's big brother of sorts.

 

[Shogmaster]

:lol








wait a minute, that's my sister you're talking about.









:lol

For the record, I had no idea you even had a sister. I was just hoping. :lol

 

[Gahiggidy]

Speaking of which...


Perhaps developers won't even be able to take advantage of what the PS3/360 have to offer in performance? Most of them, anyways.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I agree with leon on this one. Assuming these specs are legit, its a dumb move by nintendo. If they really wanted to spread the joy of the new the controller they should have spent more on the specs. Now theres a big chance that people wont even touch the damn thing because of the perceived weakness. Whats the point of making a console small?! Look at the ps2!

If the controller is so great, im not doubting is isnt, it doesnt need to be limted by the hardware in order to make it successful. If a developer sees that x game doesnt need high end graphics in order to be fun with the revmote they proabably wouldnt spend the money on it...ie Katmari.

There is no point in going that low on specs other than being cheap and or greedy. Im sorry painting a 1024 x 1024 is not more expensive to make than a 512 x 512. Shit i paint my textures at 2000+ dpi than shrink down. If its a little more powerful than xbox devs will probably use normal maps, which means you have to model high res anyway. Bagh im ranting, booooo if these specs are accurate.

 

[GDGF]

Also i'd like to add (although i'm not sure if it's been covered or not) that I expect the Revolution to have a stacked launch. Since the system is so similar to the GCN, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that quite a few cancled or late in development Gamecube games are being reworked for the new system.

"You can basically treat it like a current generation machine," one told us. "The time it'll take to ramp up to developing on this is basically nil - we can just work on a PC or maybe an Xbox, and then improve the quality of our assets when we move to the Revolution. Or even work on a Cube, in fact. The libraries are very similar."

"We could do a game for this in a few months," commented another developer. "Developing games is going to be easy, the challenge is going to be using the controller properly."

...supports this theory quite well, methinks.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

I'm trying not to laugh at how poorly Revolution is turning out. Eh, what the hell :lol :lol :lol

I even tried to remain positive about this, even though in the back of my mind, Nintendo would pull stupid bullshit like this.

What are those games made by...Radica? Some company makes the exact same games Nintendo is propositioning for Revolution. Also, with specs anywhere close to what was "leaked", nobody can port games onto it from PS3 or Xbox 360. Its not even financially worth it to invest in Revolution to most third parties.

They better get their shit together with games or else it will be a laughing stock and probably the end for Nintendo.

 

[elostyle]

I'm trying not to laugh at how poorly Revolution is turning out. Eh, what the hell :lol :lol :lol

I even tried to remain positive about this, even though in the back of my mind, Nintendo would pull stupid bullshit like this.

What are those games made by...Radica? Some company makes the exact same games Nintendo is propositioning for Revolution. Also, with specs anywhere close to what was "leaked", nobody can port games onto it from PS3 or Xbox 360. Its not even financially worth it to invest in Revolution to most third parties.

They better get their shit together with games or else it will be a laughing stock and probably the end for Nintendo.

Ports suck. Who wants ports?