Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
The author of the article basically is saying that he could not find the reggie quotes 7th posted. So he did not address the IGN specs story...at least not officially. Sorry Nfans.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The Last-Stop-Speak-In-Hyperbole Official Revolution Specs Thread
- Thread starter Jeff-DSA
- Start date
The author of the article basically is saying that he could not find the reggie quotes 7th posted. So he did not address the IGN specs story...at least not officially. Sorry Nfans.
Version 3.0
Member
The Experiment said:
Dude, chill out. Yes, Nintendo is stupid. Yes, this is a huge fuck-up. Yes, Nintendo is running from Sony. But the only bad thing about Sunshine was the marketing (pukes thinking about it). It was a fun game and better than most--a good description of many/most Nintendo games. You should be picking on Mario Party.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
Leondexter said:
Sunshine was ok...for the first 2/3 of the game. The game was pretty sloppy, especially evident in Hotel Delfino and lord help you if you try to get all the tough shines.
My point is that Nintendo themselves are getting sloppier and sloppier. Sunshine is just a representation of Nintendo today. They don't really give a shit about their past history any more and just shove whatever they can out the door, as long as they can profit from it. I have no idea what in the hell they are doing to be honest. This isn't the same Nintendo that made the NES, SNES, or hell, even the N64.
soundwave05
Member
The Experiment said:
This isn't the same Nintendo that made the GameCube either though.
Revolution is just different.
Look, man the hardcore gamer is the hot girl at the bar. But she's already being hit on by two guys who have a bigger bank account.
In that situation its better to sneak in and start chatting with her unoccupied hot friend.
Nintendo was going to get nowhere with hardcore players, even if they corrected a lot of the mistakes from the GameCube. It was better to go in a different direction.
With the Revolution they can probably price it low enough and with a great Mario game they can probably sell it to hardcore gamers easier than if they offered "GameCube 2" for $300. Now as a hardcore gamer you can easily just buy both.
The Experiment said:
I'm gonna say this:
Nintendo's expanding. They have a lot more inhouse teams than the good ol' days it seems, and even more that are third parties making first party franchises. Why? Because they realized somewhere either in the last gen or in the middle of this one that they weren't going to be on the same playing field as Sony at the rate they were producing games. Does it suck? Yeah. Pikmin 2 was fuck awesome, and it "suffered" a delay to be that good. I expect the same from Twilight Princess, and I also suspect it's the reason Super Mario Sunshine and The Wind Waker were like the way they were (though I adore TWW, despite its flaws).
In the N64 era, Nintendo delayed everything, and a lot, if not most, was amazing. In the GC era, mostly everything came out on time, with disappointed reactions. Only recently (Iwata Age?) have they really started to focus on their own games and make sure they're good and outsource the other crap.
soundwave05
Member
The reason why Sunshine/Wind Waker were sub-par was because Nintendo was tired of working on those franchises.
It was the same thing they'd already done on the N64.
Miyamoto kinda put things on snooze mode. The new controller if nothing else should reinvigorate EAD.
It was the same thing they'd already done on the N64.
Miyamoto kinda put things on snooze mode. The new controller if nothing else should reinvigorate EAD.
soundwave05
Member
AniHawk said:
It probably was a little from column A and a little from column B.
An extra 6 months in the oven probably would've helped WW and Sunshine out a lot.
Luigi's Mansion (more depth) and Mario Kart: DD (more tracks, more of a co-op DD mode) as well.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
soundwave05 said:
The Game Cube was the product of Nintendo's arrogance. They refused to fix their problems with the Nintendo 64. The Revolution is like Nintendo giving up. Like the episode of Seinfeld where George wears sweatpants (I already made that analogy.
Not really. The best is to be that great guy who uses the guys to get the girl. Nintendo still had a big shot to get back on track with Revolution. I hope they're 100% confident about their direction because they pretty much burned the bridge behind them. No turning back now.
They could have made it at least par with the current consoles. Consumers like specs, even if they don't understand them. The average consumer is just as mesmerized with technology. Its not going to reach an untapped base, its just going to attract the cheap ass gamers who will buy a Revolution as a stopgap until the PS3 gets cheap. Then they'll trade in the Revolution for the cheap PS3.
soundwave05 said:
I don't know about that. It seemed more like arrogance on Nintendo's part. They probably thought that their fanbase would eat whatever they spewed out, and felt they could get away with a lot of things. They're not tired of it, because hey, look at Zelda: TP.
heidern said:
And hopefully they stick with it this time. I don't mind waiting a bit for a AAA game, instead of getting a sloppy one a few months early.
soundwave05
Member
The Experiment said:
Do you really think a $300 "GameCube 2" would secure a large portion of the market?
I think you're actually more optimistic about that than Nintendo is. And its easy for you to say "go compete" ... you go compete with Microsoft and Sony with billions of dollars at stake and see if you don't start to sweat.
Revolution is just Nintendo accepting their role in the market.
The people in denial are actually the ones clinging more to the past than Nintendo is.
Nintendo had a great run as the traditional marketleader in this market. What they did especailly in the 80s/90s will never be forgotten as it built the foundation the entire industry is based on right now.
But times change. That wasn't going to last forever. The game market was eventually going to be run by mega-conglomerate corporations. It was inevitable. Nintendo's role in the market now is to expand the market and to bridge the growing chasm between gamers and non-gamers.
The Experiment said:
Hmmmmmm no. The Gamecube was a product of Nintendo in transition. The early part was Yamauchi, who seemed really outta touch by the end of it (though he had the idea for the DS, it's software that's helping make it a success, not "innovation"). The latter part was Iwata, who obviously likes sleeker systems that don't look like toys. He also seems to be a fan of redesigns. A BIG fan. It looked like after Iwata, development time slowed down again and stuff was being released by third parties for the most part.
I dunno. I can only speculate as to what was really going on this gen, but the puzzle pieces fit there.
Nintendo really tried hard to fix their mistakes on the N64. Though in the process they ended up creating a helluva lot more. In getting far more Japanese support, they lost a lot of western support, which was what was keeping their console afloat in the US during the late 90s.
Yeah.
Yeah, you're a clever guy.
soundwave05
Member
Three things that killed the GameCube ....
1.) The purple lunchbox design
2.) Rare/Retro/Silicon Knights all fucking up and getting myried in delay hell. These guys were supposed to provide tons of Western/"mature" content. It was supposed to be Perfect Dark, Too Human, RavenBlade, Conker, Metroid, NFL Football, Car Combat, etc.
Instead they gave the GameCube almost nothing. Nintendo had to shred Retro down to basically the "Metroid studio". Retro was supposed to have like five teams. Rare + Retro should've been a great combo for Nintendo. Instead they never even got started.
People kind of overlook this, but these guys really let Nintendo down and left Nintendo with only Resident Evil to rely on to sell to older players.
3.) Not releasing Zelda: TP first. They could have cell-shaded Zelda: WW later on. Cell shading Zelda probably also cost them several months of dev time ... according to Nintendo the game was in development and only after several months did they switch. If they hadn't done this they could've had a kickass realistic Zelda ready and polished perhaps by Christmas 2002 in North America and Japan.
1.) The purple lunchbox design
2.) Rare/Retro/Silicon Knights all fucking up and getting myried in delay hell. These guys were supposed to provide tons of Western/"mature" content. It was supposed to be Perfect Dark, Too Human, RavenBlade, Conker, Metroid, NFL Football, Car Combat, etc.
Instead they gave the GameCube almost nothing. Nintendo had to shred Retro down to basically the "Metroid studio". Retro was supposed to have like five teams. Rare + Retro should've been a great combo for Nintendo. Instead they never even got started.
People kind of overlook this, but these guys really let Nintendo down and left Nintendo with only Resident Evil to rely on to sell to older players.
3.) Not releasing Zelda: TP first. They could have cell-shaded Zelda: WW later on. Cell shading Zelda probably also cost them several months of dev time ... according to Nintendo the game was in development and only after several months did they switch. If they hadn't done this they could've had a kickass realistic Zelda ready and polished perhaps by Christmas 2002 in North America and Japan.
soundwave05 said:
Don't forget no Mario at launch.
And I blame Nintendo for what happend with Eternal Darkness. They could've you know, made people know it existed.
About Iwata. He took over in late 2003, right? I don't see what exactly he did that was so great up until recently, with the REvolution's designs. I don't count shitty third party collaberations where the develop half assed versions of Nintendo's franchises a good thing. And considering he was the one who thought of the idea of SSB and hasn't even assembled a team until now, I don't know if we can actually call him a hero, just yet.
soundwave05
Member
Oblivion said:
No Mario at launch was tough ... but they seemed to have gotten away with it. The GameCube's flaws and lack of content became much more evident in 2002.
Rare/Retro/NST/Silicon Knights were all missing in action from Jan-May 2002 when Nintendo needed them ... that absolutely killed Nintendo.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
AniHawk said:
Thanks.
The problem is that Nintendo keeps scrapping and redesigning their games. Super Mario 64 2 was in development for years and they put it off for Sunshine? They go too slow because they're so busy trying to make the perfect game that they take too long and fail to deliver what was there.
The idea behind the past was that Nintendo delivered and delivered often. They did neither with Game Cube. I don't expect them to pump out classic after classic but most of their games are sloppy, delayed, and messy in design. The only time they can deliver often now is with short, small projects that are like PC freeware games you can find on a Macromedia Flash site. They're so busy trying to profit that they care more about the quick buck than solid products that last. Not surprising that Super Smash Brothers, a HAL Laboratories game, is the best selling. They had the right idea. Nintendo does not.
Yeah but to me, its much riskier for them to go this course. They are going down a path that they can't return to. If Revolution is a failure, Nintendo in the console realm is finished. They're almost at that point now but they still have a chance. Had one anyway. Plus they had all those billions in the bank. Microsoft spent $4 billion on Xbox. They went the extra mile and it worked out well, especially since everyone in 2001 was proclaiming the Xbox to be DOA. Its better to use that $6+ billion nest egg (or some of it) now than 10 years later when they can't compete in consoles at all anymore and they aren't able to get a profit from handhelds. That is a big if. Thats a big risk for Nintendo to make.
soundwave05
Member
Why does Nintendo have to make consoles anyway?
Sega went the "extra mile" and always blew money to compete. Look where that got them.
I think Nintendo knows the war between MS and Sony is going to be *brutal* this generation, even moreso than last gen. It's going to be an absolute bloodbath between those two companies.
Revolution is a bit of a gamble, but if it pays off, then Nintendo just hit the holy grail of video gaming jackpots -- non-gamers ... people they couldn't even get with the NES.
It's worth taking a shot anyway.
Sega went the "extra mile" and always blew money to compete. Look where that got them.
I think Nintendo knows the war between MS and Sony is going to be *brutal* this generation, even moreso than last gen. It's going to be an absolute bloodbath between those two companies.
Revolution is a bit of a gamble, but if it pays off, then Nintendo just hit the holy grail of video gaming jackpots -- non-gamers ... people they couldn't even get with the NES.
It's worth taking a shot anyway.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
The problem with Game Cube was:
1) Nintendo had no hype for this machine. Sony and Microsoft are PR masters. They got everyone to get excited about their systems. Nintendo was quiet. I wouldn't doubt most people had no idea the GC existed until they saw it on the shelves.
2) Their trademark franchise games all fell short. The big thing that worked for Nintendo for the N64 was that the system had few releases but the Nintendo releases were excellent and worth waiting for. Everyone waited for the new Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, and got burned. Wind Waker, Sunshine, and Double Dash are the worst in their series. This caused a lot of people to become disillusioned with Nintendo. 2003 seems to be the year of doom for Game Cube, probably the time where most consumers realized GC was irrelevant in the scheme of gaming and that Xbox and PS2 offered much more. Even in the areas Nintendo specialized in.
3) Even worse post launch schedule than the N64. PS2 was really picking up late 2001 on and Nintendo had nothing to stop them, except Resident Evil, a series that most people have moved on from. Nintendo pretty much allowed Sony to dominate and Microsoft to chug ahead.
4) Nintendo's poor strategy of hyping their product. Their "NDA" strategy worked for them in the past but blew up in their faces this time around. There's just too much going on in the industry for Nintendo to keep quiet. Instead of being anticipated and mysterious, they were forgotten. By 2003, especially once Wind Waker was released, nobody really considered the Game Cube a threat anymore. Xbox and PS2 moved right along with Mario and Zelda released. It wasn't going to get better.
1) Nintendo had no hype for this machine. Sony and Microsoft are PR masters. They got everyone to get excited about their systems. Nintendo was quiet. I wouldn't doubt most people had no idea the GC existed until they saw it on the shelves.
2) Their trademark franchise games all fell short. The big thing that worked for Nintendo for the N64 was that the system had few releases but the Nintendo releases were excellent and worth waiting for. Everyone waited for the new Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, and got burned. Wind Waker, Sunshine, and Double Dash are the worst in their series. This caused a lot of people to become disillusioned with Nintendo. 2003 seems to be the year of doom for Game Cube, probably the time where most consumers realized GC was irrelevant in the scheme of gaming and that Xbox and PS2 offered much more. Even in the areas Nintendo specialized in.
3) Even worse post launch schedule than the N64. PS2 was really picking up late 2001 on and Nintendo had nothing to stop them, except Resident Evil, a series that most people have moved on from. Nintendo pretty much allowed Sony to dominate and Microsoft to chug ahead.
4) Nintendo's poor strategy of hyping their product. Their "NDA" strategy worked for them in the past but blew up in their faces this time around. There's just too much going on in the industry for Nintendo to keep quiet. Instead of being anticipated and mysterious, they were forgotten. By 2003, especially once Wind Waker was released, nobody really considered the Game Cube a threat anymore. Xbox and PS2 moved right along with Mario and Zelda released. It wasn't going to get better.
Wind Waker and Sunshine were both great games, arguably far better than their predecessors in many ways, each with a few flaws that held them back from being near perfect. Regardless, they had no chance in topping OoT or Mario 64 in terms of "wow" factor and impact, no matter what they released.
soundwave05
Member
Well whatever the problems were with the GameCube ... that's over and done with now.
Nintendo's moved on, and you should too.
Nintendo's moved on, and you should too.
soundwave05
Member
Actually you know what ... I thought Nintendo did a good job with third parties on the GCN.
It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback now, but if I told people at GA in summer 2001 that Nintendo would get the entire Resident Evil franchise exclusive, some pretty big time Namco support namely RPGs, and even mend fences with Square-Enix to get a Final Fantasy game .... no one would have believed it at all.
2nd parties were the problem for Nintendo, they should get more blame. Howard Lincoln envisioned Retro as a one-two punch with Rare that would supply tons of mature content for the system. Instead the guy who was running Retro was busy spending the money on partying and the company was a trainwreck.
I dunno wtf happened to Rare. It's like they moved to their bazillion dollar new HQ and just stopped making games.
It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback now, but if I told people at GA in summer 2001 that Nintendo would get the entire Resident Evil franchise exclusive, some pretty big time Namco support namely RPGs, and even mend fences with Square-Enix to get a Final Fantasy game .... no one would have believed it at all.
2nd parties were the problem for Nintendo, they should get more blame. Howard Lincoln envisioned Retro as a one-two punch with Rare that would supply tons of mature content for the system. Instead the guy who was running Retro was busy spending the money on partying and the company was a trainwreck.
I dunno wtf happened to Rare. It's like they moved to their bazillion dollar new HQ and just stopped making games.
soundwave05 said:
Not only that but they also got much better support from some of the western publishers too. Look at how EA release most of their games the same day on the GC as the other platforms. Same with Activision and their biggest franchises. Things have come along a lot further than most people realise as a basic level of support is now taken for granted.
Oblivion said:Not even close. Sorry
Sorry for what, exactly? The camera systems in both games this generation are far better, and the controls across the board are better. Unfortunately, both games lacked compelling content in comparison to their predecessors. Sunshine lacked variety in it's environments and levels (it just didn't stack up against the Mushroom Kingdom), and Wind Waker lacked dungeons (well, and the difficulty was lacking).
While I honestly believe Mario 64 and OoT are better products as a whole, strictly in terms of gameplay, I'd rather go with Sunshine and Wind Waker.
Version 3.0
Member
Ristamar said:
Exactly right. Wind Waker in particular offered refined control, more thoughtful button layout and usage, and better camera handling. The way you switch arrow types and metal boots is a huge relief from annoyance, for example. In Ocarina, swapping those (especially the boots in the Water Temple) was a pain. The combat is much smoother in Wind Waker, and going back to Ocarina/Majora afterwards feels clunky by comparison--although I'm not a big fan of the "press A" counterattack.
Twilight Princess looks like it'll refine everything even more--the combat has shield strikes and two-handed sword strikes, for example (and horseback, of course), and we can hope it's bringing back the better quality and quantity of level design that Ocarina had over Wind Waker.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
http://revolution.ign.com/articles/674/674611p1.html
I guess IGN was right, they dont deny any of it
Yea people hated the fact that the ps2 powered so slowly :rolleyes I still have hope, but damn i wish nintendo for once would go all out.
I guess IGN was right, they dont deny any of it
Yea people hated the fact that the ps2 powered so slowly :rolleyes I still have hope, but damn i wish nintendo for once would go all out.
The gamecube failed because Nintendo could not compete on a technological or marketing level. End of story. It's not their fault because the competition were about trying to dominate the homespace. And nintendo is trying to market the rev as an and console since:
1. They cant compete on a technological level.
2. They cant compete on a marketting level.
1. They cant compete on a technological level.
2. They cant compete on a marketting level.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Why do people assume they can't compete? When did Nintendo turn into a small company with no money?
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
Oblivion said:
They all pledged support but most people buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games; third party efforts are merely supplementary. Once Nintendo pissed off the casual gaming base (around 2003), third parties moved with the gamers. Although Namco has stuck it out longer than I thought they would (Baiten Kaitos 2). Capcom turned tail pretty quickly, moving anything of value to the PlayStation 2. I doubt we'll see Capcom do anything close to the Capcom 5 for the Revolution, but I still expect them to make a couple games for it.
Loading times? Pfft. Come on Nintendo. That was an excuse last generation. This generation, load times were very quick. So I'm assuming they will be using DVD-9s? I could see them using a 8x to 12x DVD-ROM drive.
I'm still holding out my final, final opinion for the games.
Doc Holliday said:http://revolution.ign.com/articles/674/674611p1.html
I guess IGN was right, they dont deny any of it
Well this paragraph is a bit odd:
So what is Nintendo's definition of 'sharper' then?
Do you think nintendo couldn't make a handheld as powerful as the PSP when they run that thing at 2/3 of the possible clock speed?Monk said:
Do you really think Nintendo couldn't have bought the same damn designs from IBM and ATI for their next home console? Why wouldn't they be able to rent production capacity in the same semiconductor factories.
On the other hand nintendo has a controller with gyro and sensor tech in it and a disc drive that can load both disc sizes for the first time ever. So Microsoft and Sony "couldn't compete on a technical level" with that either?
Please stop thinking in such narrow ways.
You were the one saying the rev has less technology, I was just saying that it has more technology in some areas than it's competition.Monk said:
Sony is making up for its losses in other departments with its game profits. Nintendo doesn't have those losses. IF (big if) sony is selling the PSP at a loss, so could nintendo.
I don't have knowledge about where the chips for the psp are actually being produced. Do you have more info on that? Is it a sony owned plant or some generic semiconductor supplier? They buy the screens from sharp as far as I know.
EDIT: Actually, I just read here on gaming age that it's being produced east of tokyo but they are planning to outsource production to china - which nintendo has already done for the DS.