Nintendo Revolution news

[NetRyder]

Mind telling me what this "innovation" from Nintendo is? They failed to include a DVD player in the Gamecube, failed to have any sort of online play.

And all their must have first party titles are sequels to games that came out 20 years ago.

I can't seem to figure this out either.

From what I gather based on his posts in multiple threads, Xie seems to be making the assumption that the GC is a better device for gamers because it doesn't include other functionality. I really don't see the logic there. I also don't think it's fair to assume that people who choose the Xbox over the GC are being sucked in by hype. The entertainment value of a game console is purely subjective - if you enjoy playing Halo 2 more than Mario Kart, you're obviously going to be more entertained on an Xbox. Or the other way around. They're both gaming devices, but they're each targeting different classes of gamers.

Integrating media center functionality into the Xbox is not a bad thing either. It just opens up device to a larger target audience. It doesn't take anything away from the gaming side of the console. Convergence is the way forward in the consumer electronics space. Companies that don't realize this now are going to get left behind eventually, there's no doubt about it. Cellphones now include PDA, media player and camera functionality. Personal computers can now be used as secondary televisions and DVR boxes. It's happening everywhere. If the Xbox, apart from being a solid gaming device, becomes a complete entertainment system that allows me to chuck my standalone DVD player, my CD player and my DVR box, I'm all for it. If you ask me, that's more innovative than anything Nintendo has done.

 

[Xie]

I can't seem to figure this out either.

From what I gather based on his posts in multiple threads, Xie seems to be making the assumption that the GC is a better device for gamers because it doesn't include other functionality. I really don't see the logic there.

I stated my reasoning above.

Integrating media center functionality into the Xbox is not a bad thing either. It just opens up device to a larger target audience. It doesn't take anything away from the gaming side of the console. Convergence is the way forward in the consumer electronics space. Companies that don't realize this now are going to get left behind eventually, there's no doubt about it. Cellphones now include PDA, media player and camera functionality. Personal computers can now be used as secondary televisions and DVR boxes. It's happening everywhere. If the Xbox, apart from being a solid gaming device, becomes a complete entertainment system that allows me to chuck my standalone DVD player, my CD player and my DVR box, I'm all for it. If you ask me, that's more innovative than anything Nintendo has done.

I believe all this integration is just a way to make you pay more for what you already have. Who doesn't have a DVD player? Who doesn't have a computer? Why would you wanna pay for those functions again when you could just buy a system that plays what you set out for in the begining, games!

The integration of all these things not only drives the price up and make it cost more to consumers, but also makes it harder for companys to turn a profit. There is a couple of really good posts over on /. right now if you get a chance you should check them out. I'm not the greatest at writting.

 

[Grandmaster]

I stated my reasoning above.

I believe all this integration is just a way to make you pay more for what you already have. Who doesn't have a DVD player? Who doesn't have a computer? Why would you wanna pay for those functions again when you could just buy a system that plays what you set out for in the begining, games!

The integration of all these things not only drives the price up and make it cost more to consumers, but also makes it harder for companys to turn a profit. There is a couple of really good posts over on /. right now if you get a chance you should check them out. I'm not the greatest at writting.

Well you could take that the other way around. Why pay more for just a box that plays games when you could spend the same amount of money and get all the extra functionality? To me it makes financial sense if you get more features for the same price. That's just basic economics.

No doubt games will cost more when the next-gen comes around, but they will go down. Just like what happened this generation. At the beginning I remember paying $80 CND for every game, now its mostly around $50 CND.

Also asking someone to read commentary on the 360 from /. is like asking someone to read commentary on Tiger from Paul Thurott

P.S. The Gamecube modem was only used by one game, I think it was a Sega RPG.

 

[Tuffgong4]

the difference in price was about the same as the extra media capabilities would add on to for the ps2 and xbox, so the gamecube was cheaper because it didn't have the media capabilities. even now it's still cheaper by 50 dollars so that just makes sense to me...but...

when it comes down to these consoles it's ALL preference. I have never really enjoyed a sony product. does that mean it's inferior? no. But I just don't like them.

Next round I will get a xbox 360 cause I loved my xbox and the new system is keeping me interested. Now that I'm a working guy and not in college anymore I will also get a next gen nintendo console. nintendo's gamecube was an extremely underrated machine. If nintendo wasn't stubborn and had more 3rd party support the system would have done better. The visuals were on par with the xbox and superior to the ps2 all with being cheaper cause it didn't have the addons.

The big blow to nintendo the past few generations was that 3rd party support and now that the key example of this (square enix) is probably going to support it(see link above in my other post) I think more 3rd party support is coming. (eventhough I wasn't a final fantasy fan square enix supporting the next gen nintendo console is huge just because of the large public battle between the two companies over the years)

but really it's all preference. I don't need the extra media capabilities of the xbox and xbox 360 but I like the games on it and the hardware behind it. If they offered a versio with out the capabilites(which won't happen) I would get that instead.

No console has replaced my dvd player or anything other device i've had but it may for some

 

[~bk]

For those who haven't seen this yet, Revolution Mock-up Video. I don't think what they show is possible at the moment.

 

[Grandmaster]

For those who haven't seen this yet, Revolution Mock-up Video. I don't think what they show is possible at the moment.

Really now. :lick:

 

[vivid_vibe]

For those who haven't seen this yet, Revolution Mock-up Video. I don't think what they show is possible at the moment.

Yeah, saw this a couple nights ago. What the heck is this supposed to mean? This couldn't be the Revolution that I've been reading about. Anybody know what this is about?

 

[~bk]

It's just a fake video made by Nintendo fans.

 

[Xie]

Well you could take that the other way around. Why pay more for just a box that plays games when you could spend the same amount of money and get all the extra functionality? To me it makes financial sense if you get more features for the same price. That's just basic economics.

No doubt games will cost more when the next-gen comes around, but they will go down. Just like what happened this generation. At the beginning I remember paying $80 CND for every game, now its mostly around $50 CND.

Also asking someone to read commentary on the 360 from /. is like asking someone to read commentary on Tiger from Paul Thurott

P.S. The Gamecube modem was only used by one game, I think it was a Sega RPG.

I would rather get a box that does 1 thing well then a box that does a tons of stuff I don't need, and does them "ok". Also I wouldn't be surprised if the Revolution halfs Sony/MS based upon their use of extra's.

As for /. the article was about Revolution, not the 360.

There was a handful of online games for Gamecube (more in Japan I think). I think the hype and stereotypes lowered those numbers a bunch.

 

[NetRyder]

I would rather get a box that does 1 thing well then a box that does a tons of stuff I don't need, and does them "ok".

That still doesn't make any sense to me. A smartphone with PDA functionality doesn't do its job as a phone any worse than a regular phone. A Media Center PC with TV/DVR functionality doesn't do its job as a personal computer any worse than a regular PC.

So what exactly makes the Xbox "ok" as compared to the GC? Selection of games? Sorry, but again, that's purely subjective as I mentioned earlier in the thread - there are people who would much rather play Halo 2 online than Mario Kart; there are also people who prefer Mario Kart to Halo 2. It's just a matter of what the person using the console prefers. It doesn't make one device better or worse than the other in general.

 

[Xie]

The more complexity you add to a device the more points of failure you open it up to. I just don't see the point in wasting $ on un-needed features in a game console. It would be similar to the folks that go out and get a totally decked out offroad functional Land Rover with the "snorkle" and everything and then use it for getting grocerys only.

 

[Grandmaster]

http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image...h-res-revolution-images-20050517022356433.jpg

http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image...h-res-revolution-images-20050517022402307.jpg

http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image...h-res-revolution-images-20050517022407369.jpg

Now that is sleeeeek. Way more impressed with this than the PS3.

 

[lancer]

grandmaster the pics don't open up, it says theres an error, please use your special martial abilities to fix this.

 

[Grandmaster]

Forgot to mention that you should copy paste the links into your address bar That was IGN's hotlink protection.

 

[ignipotentis]

So again, I've now read that the Revolution will be roughly 3-5 times more powerfull than the game cube. This does not put it anywhere near what the 360 and the PS3 are capable of. We will see shortly, but what makes big N so confident?

 

[melon]

It all depends on if that "extra power" will be utilized effectively. PS3 could have 100 teraflops, but if the software developers don't take advantage, then it won't matter. It would be like running MS-DOS 6.0 on an Athlon FX CPU.

Anyway, like I said before, I will likely be an owner of both the next Nintendo console and the PS3. I don't like "Halo," personally, so I don't see much of a need to buy XBox 360. But I'm never an early adopter, so we'll see what happens. I could change my mind.

Melon

 

[ignipotentis]

http://www.gaming-age.com/news/2005/5/17-91

"Every Nintendo Game Ever Made"

Brings a new idea to the phrase of backwards compatibility. The only question is, how much?

If its a subscription based setup similar to Live, and you have access to the full library, I think thats a great way to counter. The price of this console should also be far cheaper than the other two. I'm thinking opening at $150... about half of what the others will start at.

 

[melon]

I heard initial rumors that its online access would be free, rather than a subscription-based service like XBox Live. Of course, I would also be completely unsurprised if they did create a subscription service.

As for the price, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was much cheaper than the XBox or the PS3, since they don't have all the expensive extras bundled in the hardware. I guess that's the plus about sticking solely to gaming, rather than making a quasi-"media center."

Melon

 

[lynchknot]

http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/615/615030/imgs_1.html

 

[~bk]

Now that is sleeeeek. Way more impressed with this than the PS3.

I agree. It's a much better design than PS3. I'll probably be getting 360 and Revolution now.

Still waiting for the final design from Nintendo. That one is still a prototype.