Support NeoGAF

[GDGF]

There's really no way to answer that. It'll really depend on whether it catches the public's attention right away, I suppose. The thing is, lousy specs can't help, they can only hurt in that regard.
And believe it or not, a low price early on can be a disadvantage in terms of public perception. Strange but true.

Well, they can't price it too low. With that I agree. I figure 150 is a lock though. People say Nintendo never launched a console below 200, and that is true, but this is Iwata's Nintendo now, and obviously he has a different philosophy than Yamauchi did.

Also, if they launch at 150, you won't be seeing a price drop for years. Nintendo will hold that price until the 360 or PS3 begin to approach it. Again, years.

 

[GDGF]

The thing is: what is going to make rev customers buy 3rd party games? If 3rd parties create original, inovative and exclusive games for the revmote then I could see it. But will nintendo create a userbase big enough for 3rd parties to care? And even if they do.. will people buy them? or will they just buy mario/zelda? I honestly don't know.

Well, I figure a low price coupled with a killer app will go a long way in creating that userbase, but yeah, it's going to take original content. In the end, it won't matter too much where that content comes from. I'd imagine that the Revolution will be the first Nintendo home console to attract a fairly broad range of consumers since the NES. What I mean is, it won't be pulling from the usual pool of Nintendo loyalists, so third party sales should fair better than they've faired in quite some time.

 

[SpiffyG]

Your doomsday scenario has been Nintendo's home console reality for the last two generations. That's why they're trying something different.

I think it's actually going to get quite a few 3rd party exclusives. Last gen, the GameCube had nothing special to offer. Xbox had the "superior" graphics (supposedly) and the pre-teen, racist, homphobe installed base. PS2 has the RPG fans and a HUUUGE installed base.

 

[Y2Kev]

Xbox had the "superior" graphics (supposedly) and the pre-teen, racist, homphobe installed base.

:lol Why must everyone reduce Xbox owners to some type of testosterone-laden stereotype? Should Maya Angelou come out and say she rocks at Halo?

 

[koam]

There's a bad perception about the "specs" that many have here. 1Ghz on a console is equivalent to over 2Ghz on a PC: You don't have an OS to worry about, the hardware is always the same and the machine is designed with the purpose of games in mind. The specs seem pretty low but they're not as bad as people are making them sound.

For starters, we know nothing about the videocard and that's what will really make the difference. What kind of effects will it have? Will it have this rumored "Cube mapping"? How many polygons can it push with effects on? Let's not forget that all of this will be on a mear 640x480.

I remember back in the day when everyone thought "bits" meant everything in the world. HOLY SHIT DUDE N64 IS 64BITS. In the end, it turned out that bits didn't mean much as the Xbox 1 was 32 bits and was WAY more powerful than the N64. Nowadays, it's not the CPU that really matters but rather the videocard and the effects the videocard can produce.

I'm not saying this in order to defend the system's power, it will undoubtably be less powerful than the 360 and ps3. I just think that people who think this will look similar to the Xbox are really in for a surprise. This is a lot more capable than an Xbox. Don't base yourselves on CPU speed and RAM there are way too many other factors to account for. The difference would be significant if Nintendo made the Rev HD compatible.

 

[GDGF]

I think it's actually going to get quite a few 3rd party exclusives. Last gen, the GameCube had nothing special to offer. Xbox had the "superior" graphics (supposedly) and the pre-teen, racist, homphobe installed base. PS2 has the RPG fans and a HUUUGE installed base.

Yeah, I agree. The controller is going to pretty much force a certain ammount of exclusive games, which is all fine and dandy since developers seem to really dig it. Developers want to make games using that controller. Like you said, the Gamecube never had a hook; never found it's nich.

 

[GDGF]

There's a bad perception about the "specs" that many have here. 1Ghz on a console is equivalent to over 2Ghz on a PC: You don't have an OS to worry about, the hardware is always the same and the machine is designed with the purpose of games in mind. The specs seem pretty low but they're not as bad as people are making them sound.

For starters, we know nothing about the videocard and that's what will really make the difference. What kind of effects will it have? Will it have this rumored "Cube mapping"? How many polygons can it push with effects on? Let's not forget that all of this will be on a mear 640x480.

I remember back in the day when everyone thought "bits" meant everything in the world. HOLY SHIT DUDE N64 IS 64BITS. In the end, it turned out that bits didn't mean much as the Xbox 1 was 32 bits and was WAY more powerful than the N64. Nowadays, it's not the CPU that really matters but rather the videocard and the effects the videocard can produce.

I'm not saying this in order to defend the system's power, it will undoubtably be less powerful than the 360 and ps3. I just think that people who think this will look similar to the Xbox are really in for a surprise. This is a lot more capable than an Xbox. Don't base yourselves on CPU speed and RAM there are way too many other factors to account for. The difference would be significant if Nintendo made the Rev HD compatible.

It's going to be able to do games that look like Half-Life 2. Half-Life 2 is comparable to anything the 360 has done so far. It's not like the graphics are going to look like an N64 game (unless you've downloaded one ofcourse)

 

[heidern]

Well, they can't price it too low. With that I agree. I figure 150 is a lock though. People say Nintendo never launched a console below 200, and that is true, but this is Iwata's Nintendo now, and obviously he has a different philosophy than Yamauchi did

Nintendo also haven't released a console that is pretty much an entire generation behind their competitors. Seriously, from what we know, if Nintendo packed this system(wi-fi, flash memory, expensive LED and casing and slot loading drive) with a current Gamecube style controller, I have a hard time believing they wouldn't be making profit at $99. It really comes down to how much the sensor bar costs. If it is expensive tech then sure, a $150 price is realistic, or if it's more expensive than the rest of the system put together then even a $200 price becomes a realistic option, but then it better be damn good to be able to counter next-gen technology otherwise Nintendo are fucked.

I know people bring up the GBM, but that is not an accurate comparison. The GBM is simply carrying on the tradition of Nintendo handheld hardware being mega profit centres. It's a different business model and it is also a way of squeezing out extra from the realm that they dominate. Nintendo simlpy don't have the luxury of profiteering on their console hardware in the face of stiff competition from Sony/MS. Judging by the lukewarm reaction to the GBM, and the improved sales the DS has seen since the price cut as wella s the non-gamer demographic they ar trying to attract, I think they're gonna price this as low as they can and do their profiteering off of the software sales.

 

[Gahiggidy]

by the way, I don't like how the developers are comparing it to an Xbox. That assumes that the GameCube was far behind in graphic fidelity. Truth is that with another 12MB of 1-STRAM and a few more instructions for pixels effects... it would've been dead even with the Xbox.

 

[Y2Kev]

It's going to be able to do games that look like Half-Life 2. Half-Life 2 is comparable to anything the 360 has done so far. It's not like the graphics are going to look like an N64 game (unless you've downloaded one ofcourse)

Do you seriously not take issue with your own comparison?

 

[GDGF]

Nintendo also haven't released a console that is pretty much an entire generation behind their competitors. Seriously, from what we know, if Nintendo packed this system(wi-fi, flash memory, expensive LED and casing and slot loading drive) with a current Gamecube style controller, I have a hard time believing they wouldn't be making profit at $99. It really comes down to how much the sensor bar costs. If it is expensive tech then sure, a $150 price is realistic, or if it's more expensive than the rest of the system put together then even a $200 price becomes a realistic option, but then it better be damn good to be able to counter next-gen technology otherwise Nintendo are fucked.

I know people bring up the GBM, but that is not an accurate comparison. The GBM is simply carrying on the tradition of Nintendo handheld hardware being mega profit centres. It's a different business model and it is also a way of squeezing out extra from the realm that they dominate. Nintendo simlpy don't have the luxury of profiteering on their console hardware in the face of stiff competition from Sony/MS. Judging by the lukewarm reaction to the GBM, and the improved sales the DS has seen since the price cut as wella s the non-gamer demographic they ar trying to attract, I think they're gonna price this as low as they can and do their profiteering off of the software sales.

True, that. I'm not saying Nintendo couldn't launch the system for 99 bucks, I just don't think they would (should). It would put their pricing model all out of wack. By the time the Revolution launches, the NDS will be $99 bucks. Also Nintendo needs room to have at least one drop to 99 bucks incase something goes horribly wrong (a bad christmas line-up for example)

 

[GDGF]

Do you seriously not take issue with your own comparison?

What, comparing Half-Life 2 to your average XBOX 360 game? No.

 

[GDGF]

by the way, I don't like how the developers are comparing it to an Xbox. That assumes that the GameCube was far behind in graphic fidelity. Truth is that with another 12MB of 1-STRAM and a few more instructions for pixels effects... it would've been dead even with the Xbox.

From what i've read, they're saying it's more powerful than an XBOX. Didn't the quote say something like 'we can develop for PC, XboX or even a Gamecube, and upgrade the assets' or something like that?

 

[koam]

True, that. I'm not saying Nintendo couldn't launch the system for 99 bucks, I just don't think they would (should). It would put their pricing model all out of wack. By the time the Revolution launches, the NDS will be $99 bucks. Also Nintendo needs room to have at least one drop to 99 bucks incase something goes horribly wrong (a bad christmas line-up for example)

They would simply drop it to $79.99 or do what they're doing now, bundle it up with new games for free. The console market has typically taken a hit when selling hardware and make up for it via accessories and software. The handheld market relies on selling hardware at a profit (The PSP makes up the loss by bundling up with the value/giga packs).

 

[Y2Kev]

What, comparing Half-Life 2 to your average XBOX 360 game? No.

Comparing HL2-- of which the high end profile would not run on the cited Revolution specs without heavy optimization-- to launch Xbox 360 titles. Yes, sounds fair. The pinnacle of FPS games and probably the high end of what the Rev could do vs. the low end of what the 360 could do.

Yeah, okay. Put it up against Gears of War and HL2 gets freaking blown away.

 

[Gahiggidy]

True, that. I'm not saying Nintendo couldn't launch the system for 99 bucks, I just don't think they would (should). It would put their pricing model all out of wack. By the time the Revolution launches, the NDS will be $99 bucks. Also Nintendo needs room to have at least one drop to 99 bucks incase something goes horribly wrong (a bad christmas line-up for example)

Alot depends on whether they can keep up with demand for the luanch. THe amount of potential early-adopters between $149 and $99 is enourmous. Its all for moot if they can only have between 1-2 million (US launch). If supply is going to be limited, might as well soak the fans and save $99 for another year.

 

[GDGF]

They would simply drop it to $79.99 or do what they're doing now, bundle it up with new games for free. The console market has typically taken a hit when selling hardware and make up for it via accessories and software. The handheld market relies on selling hardware at a profit (The PSP makes up the loss by bundling up with the value/giga packs).

I see where you're coming from, and I would love a 99 dollar Revolution, but I ain't expecting it. I also don't expect it to go over 150. Either way, I think Nintendo's gonna be fine (but yeah, they will sell more over time at 99 bucks...gotta remember though, the first million or so will sell regardless)

Alot depends on whether they can keep up with demand for the luanch. THe amount of potential early-adopters between $149 and $99 is enourmous. Its all for moot if they can only have between 1-2 million (US launch). If supply is going to be limited, might as well soak the fans and save $99 for another year.

Exactly.

 

[GDGF]

Comparing HL2-- of which the high end profile would not run on the cited Revolution specs without heavy optimization-- to launch Xbox 360 titles. Yes, sounds fair. The pinnacle of FPS games and probably the high end of what the Rev could do vs. the low end of what the 360 could do.

Yeah, okay. Put it up against Gears of War and HL2 gets freaking blown away.

Yeah, but I'd expect most games on the XboX 360 to look more like Half-Life 2 than Gears of War...at least for a while.

Revolution has the added benefit of developers already knowing how to push it. Devs are still figuring the best way to use the multicored 360. Thanks to this, we'll probably be seeing alot more games on the Revolution that look like Half-Life 2 than we'll be seeing 360 games that look like Gears of War.

 

[koam]

I see where you're coming from, and I would love a 99 dollar Revolution, but I ain't expecting it. I also don't expect it to go over 150. Either way, I think Nintendo's gonna be fine (but yeah, they will sell more over time at 99 bucks...gotta remember though, the first million or so will sell regardless)

Oh don't get me wrong, your guess at the rev's price is as good as any, i'm just saying that $99 is also possible and that's how.

Btw here's a saddening little fact: "workable" dev kits were released to 3rd parties only last week.

The reason you're seeing this news now rather than sooner (or later) is because workable Revolution development kits went out to various third parties only last week. Now that studios have had some time with the incomplete, but still very telling hardware, they are starting to spill the beans to us. I imagine that as time passes, you're going to see more and more outlets backing up our articles with reports of their own. We're well past the speculation stage.

http://revolution.ign.com/mail/

 

[Y2Kev]

Yeah, but I'd expect most games on the XboX 360 to look more like Half-Life 2 than Gears of War...at least for a while.

Revolution has the added benefit of developers already knowing how to push it. Devs are still figuring the best way to use the multicored 360. Thanks to this, we'll probably be seeing alot more games on the Revolution that look like Half-Life 2 than we'll be seeing 360 games that look like Gears of War.

So Revolution will do HL2 and most Xbox 360 games will look like HL2.

That's what you are saying?

 

[GDGF]

So Revolution will do HL2 and most Xbox 360 games will look like HL2.

That's what you are saying?

At least for a while. Not all 360 games are going to look like HL2 (not trying to badmouth the system) but I figure that the majority of dev's out there will be happy to get HL2 quality visuals and animation from the 360 (at least in the begining). I think that's what some people mean with the whole "The Revolution is like (insert 360 game here) but without HD visuals" Hell, if Resident Evil 4 had a slightly increased poly count and ran at a smooth 60, it could pass as a 360 game in standard definition. Not an insult at all, just truthsaying

 

[Jonnyram]

Btw here's a saddening little fact: "workable" dev kits were released to 3rd parties only last week.

That's not that saddening. In fact that's pretty good if they're aiming to release the hardware this time next year. Also, I think that some selected 3rd parties have had dev kits longer.

 

[capslock]

Oh don't get me wrong, your guess at the rev's price is as good as any, i'm just saying that $99 is also possible and that's how.

Btw here's a saddening little fact: "workable" dev kits were released to 3rd parties only last week.



http://revolution.ign.com/mail/

Well, now that we know the basic specs and design of the hardware, I think they could have taken another six months to release the kits and they still would have been able to put out games for a fall 2006 launch.

 

[Version 3.0]

:lol Why must everyone reduce Xbox owners to some type of testosterone-laden stereotype? Should Maya Angelou come out and say she rocks at Halo?

The same reason Gamecube owners are all toddlers: because there's some truth to it.

 

[Jesus Carbomb]

Flo_Evans doomsday scenario may not be that far off... Iwata himself has stated as much and while it would not be an ideal situation, I think they are fully prepared to go at it alone with Revolution. They'll have sparse third party support from the usual big name publisher but that's about it.

This is all a worse case scenario however and it could very well be the total opposite as proven by the success of the DS and the support it has seen from third parties. Here's what Iwata had to say back in November.

Nintendo President Talks Revolution Says third party support may not be in the cards. Full story. by Matt Casamassina

November 23, 2005 - In a recent interview with overseas trade publication MCV, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata talked about the company's forthcoming home console, codenamed Revolution. Iwata reiterated that the platform would be fundamentally different from other game systems, and said that its unique make-up could potentially alienate third party publishers, or in contrast draw them in.

"If the next generation platforms are going to create even more gorgeous looking games using further enhanced functionality, and if that next-gen market can still expand the games industry, then I'm afraid that third-parties may not support Nintendo," he said.

Iwata once more compared Revolution to Nintendo DS, and said that like its portable the machine could gain the eye of consumers who normally don't care about games. "On the other hand, what we are trying to do is such a different thing, and people have come to realize that the approach we have taken with Nintendo DS can actually expand the market beyond what existing platforms can do. Therefore I believe there should be more third parties who are willing to support Nintendo's new ideas."

Nintendo's president suggested that third party support for Revolution could depend entirely on whether or not publishers find the console appealing. "If we receive the support of the licensees, I believe we will expand third party support," he said. "If our ideas cannot be appealing enough, then we cannot receive third party support."

Iwata indicated that the next-generation is a risky business for all hardware manufacturers and not just Nintendo. "Already publishers are not hesitant in disclosing their concerns over next generation gaming platforms, and development costs are rising. Publishers are afraid... of whether [the next-gen] consoles can appeal to people who are not the avid game fans of today."

Source

 

[Chrono]

Well, now that we know the basic specs and design of the hardware, I think they could have taken another six months to release the kits and they still would have been able to put out games for a fall 2006 launch.

Yeah..

Now that I think about it, even if they started on super smash bros. at around E3 they'll still have enough time to make a game for late 2006. No learning curve, same hardware they've been working with for YEARS except now it can do more stuff.

Nintendo has no excuse this time. Their output this upcoming generation should destroy GCN's support.

 

[Oblivion]

Flo_Evans doomsday scenario may not be that far off... Iwata himself has stated as much and while it would not be an ideal situation, I think they are fully prepared to go at it alone with Revolution. They'll have sparse third party support from the usual big name publisher but that's about it.

This is all a worse case scenario however and it could very well be the total opposite as proven by the success of the DS and the support it has seen from third parties. Here's what Iwata had to say back in November.



Source

That's just about third parties. Even if they jump ship, just a couple of excellent games from Nintendo will be more than enough to protect them from "doom".

 

[Jesus Carbomb]

Oh no doubt, when I brought up the "doomsday scenario" I was speaking fully in terms of third party support for the Revolution itself, it wasn't an outlook on Nintendo's status as a viable company as a whole.

 

[Oblivion]

Oh, okay. My mistake. Carry on

 

[SpiffyG]

Yeah..

Now that I think about it, even if they started on super smash bros. at around E3 they'll still have enough time to make a game for late 2006. No learning curve, same hardware they've been working with for YEARS except now it can do more stuff.

I hope so.

Nintendo has no excuse this time. Their output this upcoming generation should destroy GCN's support.

It better.

 

[Mashing]

Everyone trumpets this, but I don't buy it. People again believe in a perceived value. Just by the cost of the 360 and the media hoopla, people KNOW it is powerful. They THINK it's powerful. Notions like these spread quickly in the non-gamer community (how long did it take for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to ask if your xbox 360 exploded?).

If the Rev launches at 99, it might hurt it. Sure, it'll be accessible and cheap, but people will understand that it's not a super high tech piece of equipment.

And marginally powerful to the hardcore? Come on. That's not true. Look at the GAF crowd...people figuratively fought to the death over the Rev specs.

It's hard to ignore a fucking $300 price difference. You could buy 4 Rev's for the price of ONE X360 (non retard pack). That's a pretty big far cry from $50-$100 difference there was this past generation.

 

[Gahiggidy]

Nintendo also may have the advantage of not having to respond to Sony/Microsoft price cuts... at all. By the time they get down to $150 range, the generation will probably be about to end anyways. Nintendo could just stick to a nice low price-pont, and ride the whole generation out right there... all the while having reduced costs making the kit more and more profitable for Nintendo.

 

[Mrbob]

Nintendo also may have the advantage of not having to respond to Sony/Microsoft price cuts... at all. By the time they get down to $150 range, the generation will probably be about to end anyways. Nintendo could just stick to a nice low price-pont, and ride the whole generation out right there... all the while having reduced costs making the kit more and more profitable for Nintendo.

Cheap ass gamers will probably pick up a PS2 instead.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Iwata once mentioned that they were thinking about different bundling schemes when asked about how they were gonna package the controller and classic shell. To me, it sounded like Nintendo was gonna go for different bundles. If so, a $99 bare-bones level bundle is possiblea launch. At $99, Nintendo would put some instant pressure on it's competitors even without dirrectly competing in the "specs" race. Alot will question why it's so cheap...or...they may question why the other systems are so expensive. At such a low price, Nintendo wouldn't have to drop for a LONG time since it would take possibly 2 years before PS3 or X-BOX 360 could come within $100 of it?

This could also go along with why Revolution could launch so late. If it's *just* a GCN "turbo" with a new controller why wait a whole year to launch? Besides getting software ready, maybe they're waiting to have enough hardware ready for launch. I mean, if it's gonna be cheap then they'll wanna have tons of units for launch to capitalize...especially it's after PS3 and that system suffers from it's inevitable shortages.

 

[Mrbob]

$99 won't happen.

At this pricepoint this puts Revolution up against the PS2 and this is a battle Nintendo will lose.

Comparable graphics, cheaper hardware and cheaper games on PS2.

Hmm I wonder if PS2 can outsell Revolution through 2010.

 

[Ristamar]

This could also go along with why Revolution could launch so late. If it's *just* a GCN "turbo" with a new controller why wait a whole year to launch? Besides getting software ready, maybe they're waiting to have enough hardware ready for launch.

I'd say it has likely has more to do with finishing and refining their online interface and infrastructure.

 

[Mrbob]

Funny how some of you automatically think people will pick up a Revolution because it is cheaper than the PS3/X360. If gamers are going cheap they will more than likely pick up a PS2 instead. Say what you want about the wand, but Revolution won't have the diverse game lineup Sony has amassed for the PS2. Plus PS2 software will be cheaper than Revolution software (On average, especially factoring in Greatest Hits), plus the hardware should be at a cheaper price. Sony has sold over 100 million units and the hardware is still at $149! They are so smooth. PS2 is the key to victory in the upcoming console race and their support for the PS2 will help ensure they dominate the competition again. New PS2 games will be pumping out into 2007 and perhaps 2008. Those people buying cheap PS2s in 2005/2006 will be more inclined to buy a PS3 in 2009/2010. This is why you don't drop current gen consoles like a rock (I'm looking at you Gamecube and Xbox) in the wake of new product. It keeps gamers happy and in the family.

 

[Chrono]

Funny how some of you automatically think people will pick up a Revolution because it is cheaper than the PS3/X360. If gamers are going cheap they will more than likely pick up a PS2 instead. Say what you want about the wand, but Revolution won't have the diverse game lineup Sony has amassed for the PS2. Plus PS2 software will be cheaper than Revolution software (On average, especially factoring in Greatest Hits), plus the hardware should be at a cheaper price. Sony has sold over 100 million units and the hardware is still at $149! They are so smooth. PS2 is the key to victory in the upcoming console race and their support for the PS2 will help ensure they dominate the competition again. New PS2 games will be pumping out into 2007 and perhaps 2008. Those people buying cheap PS2s in 2005/2006 will be more inclined to buy a PS3 in 2009/2010. This is why you don't drop current genconsoles like a rock (I'm looking at you Gamecube and Xbox) in the wake of new product. It keeps gamers happy and in the family.

Like someone mentioned before, you really should be an analyst dude. Seriously. :lol

 

[Beer Monkey]

Cheap ass gamers probably already have a PS2.

Fixed.

 

[Gahiggidy]

Cheap ass gamers will probably pick up a PS2 instead.

Was I talking about the PS2? No.

I wanted to make the point that Revolution is far enough out of the price range of the competition that it won't have to respond to thier price wars...(which, if you look back at the GCN generation.. mostly hurt Nintendo having to respond to Sony and Microsoft). They were already turing a profit by E3-02, but the $100 price cuts by Sony and Microsoft forced them to go back into the red. Now Nintendo will be on its own schedule and can chart a highly profitable lifespan for its console.

Remember what Reggie said. Being #1 in the traditional console market doesn't garuantee profits.

 

[Community Forum]

Funny how some of you automatically think people will pick up a Revolution because it is cheaper than the PS3/X360. If gamers are going cheap they will more than likely pick up a PS2 instead. Say what you want about the wand, but Revolution won't have the diverse game lineup Sony has amassed for the PS2. Plus PS2 software will be cheaper than Revolution software (On average, especially factoring in Greatest Hits), plus the hardware should be at a cheaper price. Sony has sold over 100 million units and the hardware is still at $149! They are so smooth. PS2 is the key to victory in the upcoming console race and their support for the PS2 will help ensure they dominate the competition again. New PS2 games will be pumping out into 2007 and perhaps 2008. Those people buying cheap PS2s in 2005/2006 will be more inclined to buy a PS3 in 2009/2010. This is why you don't drop current gen consoles like a rock (I'm looking at you Gamecube and Xbox) in the wake of new product. It keeps gamers happy and in the family.

I see what you are saying, and that's a very good point. However, that's 100 million people (roughly) that already have a PS2, so they certainly won't be considering a PS2 purchase. For those with a PS2 looking at picking up a new system, they will be looking at the Revolution compared to PS3 and Xbox 360. Now looking at it from a first time console buyer or those that don't play games, then yes, I can see it coming down to PS2 and Revolution.

 

[Oblivion]

$99 won't happen.

At this pricepoint this puts Revolution up against the PS2 and this is a battle Nintendo will lose.

Comparable graphics, cheaper hardware and cheaper games on PS2.

Hmm I wonder if PS2 can outsell Revolution through 2010.

Forgetting about the graphics for a second, you expect an all new console with new features and whatnot to be outsold by a current gen console? LOL.

 

[DjangoReinhardt]

My hope for the Revolution is that somewhere between the interface and the low development costs, we get the first legitimate alternative/indie console. I'd love to see it become the place for designers who aren't interested in the "annual graphic update mission pack" approach that's going to get even worse on the PS3 and 360.

 

[neptunes]

Forgetting about the graphics for a second, you expect an all new console with new features and whatnot to be outsold by a current gen console? LOL.

It's happening with the GBA and the DS/PSP.

but I kinda see what you mean there

 

[mashoutposse]

Forgetting about the graphics for a second, you expect an all new console with new features and whatnot to be outsold by a current gen console? LOL.

PSX outsold XBOX and GC for the first 6 months.

 

[SpiffyG]

My hope for the Revolution is that somewhere between the interface and the low development costs, we get the first legitimate alternative/indie console. I'd love to see it become the place for designers who aren't interested in the "annual graphic update mission pack" approach that's going to get even worse on the PS3 and 360.

I agree. That would be nice.

 

[Gahiggidy]

Oh absolutly. They're also using the same fabrication plants they used for GAMECUBE as well so that saves manufacturing money/time right there.

...

Link?

 

[Oblivion]

PSX outsold XBOX and GC for the first 6 months.

What? I really somehow doubt that considering both GC and Xbox had impressive launch weeks.

 

[ziran]

it sounds like nintendo is going to be releasing a current gen spec console with a new controller, which is a huge gamble and third parties are going to make or break it imo. i don't think ds comparisons are accurate because just about all third parties were on board from day 1 because of nintendo's handheld success, that scenario doesn't exist with their home console.

who would you back if you were a third party?

everything is telling developers 360 and ps3 have potential to sell. the press love them and so does the hardcore. while i believe the market will shrink next gen and gamers will be taking less risks and only buying tried and tested games (in declining amounts) and a few new franchises, ps3 and 360 certainly seem safer bets for companies.

it's been said many times, but it's going to come down to the games, predominantly those developed and published by nintendo, and we haven't seen any yet. the interesting thing is no-one can predict what's going to happen here. nintendo is probably the most talented developer in the world and especially gifted in understanding what millions of people want to play.

it's back to wait and see time.

 

[Oblivion]

I'll ask this again, since I'm rather curious of what you all think. What if the GC:

-launched with a real Mario platformer
-Had a Zelda game that went with the 2000 Spaceworld demo, instead of WW.
-Was sleek and sexy looking
-Delivered AAA Starfoxes, Donkey Kongs, and other Nintendo franchises

Would your outlook on the GC be any different?