Revolution specs beginning to be revealed

[fnddf2]

I don't know if someone has mentioned this here, but for those who have not seen it:

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673799p1.html

There is a link early on in the article with some earlier comments from developers.  At the end, some developers are speculating that Revolution may be $149, and possibly $99.

[Roac]

Wow.  They may well so under-build their box that nothing will cross platform onto their box, whereas unless the pointer control is required, anything for theirs can go to the others.  That could well kill the box.

[MrHat]

Wow.  They may well so under-build their box that nothing will cross platform onto their box, whereas unless the pointer control is required, anything for theirs can go to the others.  That could well kill the box.

Nope, I'd buy it for $99.

[Roac]

If nothing on the 360 / ps3 will port down to the revolution, you won't have a lot to play but Nintendo custom stuff at $99.

[schild]

If nothing on the 360 / ps3 will port down to the revolution, you won't have a lot to play but Nintendo custom stuff at $99.

Which is no doubt their plan. I'm pretty sure I said that 6 months ago when they said the Revolution would most likely not be high-def.

[MrHat]

If nothing on the 360 / ps3 will port down to the revolution, you won't have a lot to play but Nintendo custom stuff at $99.

It won't be a replacement for my 360/ps3.  It will be my Revolution.

[Strazos]

As long As I get a ton of those past Nintendo games, and maybe even some Sega or something, I'll be happy to pay, probably.

[Merusk]

Revolution will build on GameCube's configuration of 24MBs 1T-SRAM and 16MBs D-RAM (40MBs) by adding an addition 64MBs of 1T-SRAM. The result is a supply of memory in Revolution that totals 104MBs.

Not being a huge hardware geek, I didn't realize the Cube had so little ram.  Some fantastic graphics (for a console, hush Sky.) for so little power. 

If it's $99 or even $150 I'll buy it at release, unlike any previous console.   I've always waited 2-3 years for the price to plummet and give me a nice big library of games to choose from at bargin prices.

Like Hat said, it's not a replacement for anything, I'm buying it to have it and the games on it.  At a bargin price, no less. (Which unlike you young, childless, unmarried, non-homeowning folks forget, does matter.)

[Fabricated]

I find myself less and less interested in the revolution as more info comes out.

[Nija]

I'll wait and buy one when they're listed at $25 in the huge check-out aisle in Frys. Between the beef jerky and the plush toys.

[Margalis]

It isn't nearly the deal you guys are making it out to be. To support HD the XBox needs 4x the RAM, fill rate, etc, just to break even. Resolution is the single most expensive thing you can add to a system.

3x better than the GC sounds fine to me.

Now, 3x better than the GC with HD support would actually end up *worse* than the GC. That would be bad. HD support is monumentally expensive as far as performance goes.

[Pococurante]

The more I hear the more I think I'll wait for the next next-gen, which is a bit of a shame since I'd already taken the perspective a few years ago.  If game publishers want to train me not to buy PC games that's fine too - they're just creating a gaping maw of low/non-barrier to entry for newer hungrier companies.

[Roac]

It isn't nearly the deal you guys are making it out to be. To support HD the XBox needs 4x the RAM, fill rate, etc, just to break even. Resolution is the single most expensive thing you can add to a system.

3x better than the GC sounds fine to me.

Now, 3x better than the GC with HD support would actually end up *worse* than the GC. That would be bad. HD support is monumentally expensive as far as performance goes.

I don't care about HD, because I don't own an HD TV, nor do I have plans for one until the government rips my current ones from my cold, analog hands.  People who do have them are probably also the people who don't mind dropping $400 down for the 360, or buying one at 2-3x the store price on ebay.  MS wants to be cutting edge, and that's fine.  I don't.

As for the HD, I would like having one in the Rev.  Not all games would need to support it, but they're useful if you want to allow patched content.  Say, for an MMOG, or a NWNesque game.  For performance and support, no game would want to use the HD unless it had do, but it's available if they want it.

[Dren]

I'll buy it at that price.  I'm not getting 360 at its price.  Like said above.  Price does matter.  HD, best of the best, etc. not so much.  If this is Nintendo's strategy, I think it is a good one.  It is where the masses are.  Why fight with Microsoft and Sony for a small piece of the pie?  Go for that big fat chunk at the other side of the tin.

[Jimbo]

My son and I love Paper Mario 1 and 2, Animal Crossing is fun for him, and Rogue Squadron is fun too.  The party games are fun to play with a bunch of people too.

Will we get this one?  Not yet...fact is we will probably wait for a while to get any of the new ones coming out.

[Dren]

My son and I love Paper Mario 1 and 2, Animal Crossing is fun for him, and Rogue Squadron is fun too.  The party games are fun to play with a bunch of people too.

Will we get this one?  Not yet...fact is we will probably wait for a while to get any of the new ones coming out.

Yeah, I didn't mention that is my plan too.  I'm currently buying up used games for $9.99 or less on the GC.  The kids and I are in heaven with all the "new" games and that will last us quite awhile yet.  Not to mention that the GC games will continue to drop in price as they are phased out.

Mmmm, I like scraps.

[schild]

Having worked at pretty much every large games retailer since before the gamecube came out up until now, I can tell you that Gamecube prices drop at a far slower pace than every other system (except the gameboy advance). The number one theory for this: there's less. Of every game. That's the only thing that keeps a games prices up on the market. That's why Enter the Matrix dropped to $29.99 days after release in big box and boutique stores. It's why Bad Boys II for the Xbox and PS2 did as well. It's all about the numbers under the counter. The less of something, the higher the value. PS1 games from Atlus/Nippon Ichi or PS2 games like Rez and Disgaea are good examples of this. Hell, even the Gamecube game Cubivore (coincedentally, by Atlus) is so expensive. It's a terrible game, but it went discountinued in the computer the day after it shipped - not even after they could sell it. Same thing happened right now with DDR Mario Mix. There's supposed to be a resupply of that title in February but they aren't admitting that to games press because they simply want people to keep buying Gamecubes. That title could also, single handedly, be the reason the Gamecube went up $10 at EB/Gamestop.

As for the Revolution, I wouldn't be surprised if games are $39-$49 at launch and best sellers (smash bros, etc) come out at $29. They'll corner the market on Nintendo stuff as always, but they''ll make less and less of everything. While you can't sell what's not on store shelves, you can make sure there's less of a used market for your games. Nintendo has managed to do that pretty well. Ship conservatively and ship when there's demand. EB/GS makes a killing off selling old versions of Madden, but there simply aren't enough GC titles in peoples hands for there to be a big used market. So prices on "new" games don't drop as they phase out. Dren's situation is simply the result of things being shipped in bulk - like Paper Mario (which dropped to $29.99 shortly after release because of too much stock and is now BACK up to $49.99) - being reprinted and a slight devaluation in the cost of Gamecube games due to the inevitable release of the 360.

That's a lot of writing to just say used PS2 games are cheaper across the board. And kids are easily entertained.

[Sky]

Nintendo's market may be niche and shrinking, but it's there. I don't like consoles but I have a Cube and I really like (most of) the games I have for it. Mario Sunshine was a big disappointment after Mario 64 imo. But other than that, it's been a great little system for the handful of titles. Revolution will be the same.

However, I'm not sure I could deal with the remote controller nunchaku dongle. That looks completely stupid.

And yes, Schild makes the proper good points about boxes: I wish RE4 would get a bit cheaper ;) Smash Bros has only come down in price, used, since friggin launch, in the last couple months!

[Jamiko]

I'm a parent, and my kids like Nintendo. I didn't tell them anything, it's what the kids in school talk about. We have a PS1, PS2, DS, GC and N64 (my son asked for this for his last birthday, was the best $20 I've ever spent). The PS1 and PS2 are now in storage (I like the PS2 personally but always end up gaming on the PC). The N64 gets the most use, followed by the GC and DS. Plain truth is that around my world, Nintendo has what kids like to play and there are a lot of kids. We have no plans to buy any XBox, ever. The PS3 is not likely to get purchased. The Revolution, should the kids like it, will be any easy purchase at that kind of price point.

Specs be damned.

Oh one more thing. Any time we go somewhere that the kids will all be hanging out, guess what every kid whips out? GameBoy. They play on that, trading games, all while talking about the GameCube games they have. *That* is worth it's weight in gold. None of them give a crap about  the other consoles.

[MorJadedThnU]

When people drone on about how the X360 and PS3 wil crush Nintendo bnecause of framerates and graphics and whatnot...

Ask them why more people play simple, unassuming chess than large, complex World in Flames (to take an extreme boardgame example). Ask them why low-res Monkey Island I and II are (fondly) remembered better than, say, Cryo's higher-resolution adventure games.

It's all in the gameplay and "intangibles" like style and story. Cross-platform releases seem too often to go cross-platform because they cannot recoup the costs on one platform alone. Make it cheap to make games on the Revolution (like it already is for the GBA and probably DS), and Nintendo will come out on the plus side.

[HaemishM]

You know what? Resident Evil 4 on the Gamecube (with the stated hardware specs on the GC that I didn't know before I played the game) proves it's not what the hardware CAN do, it's what you motherfuckers can do with it. Fuck Hi-Def, fuck RAM, fuck CPU's and GPU's, if you can program RE4 on the tech specs of the Cube, you don't NEED any of that other shit.

[schild]

You know what? Resident Evil 4 on the Gamecube (with the stated hardware specs on the GC that I didn't know before I played the game) proves it's not what the hardware CAN do, it's what you motherfuckers can do with it. Fuck Hi-Def, fuck RAM, fuck CPU's and GPU's, if you can program RE4 on the tech specs of the Cube, you don't NEED any of that other shit.

Bullshit. When you see RE5 on an Xbox 360 running on a hi-def screen, you'll sing a different song. That probably won't even be ported to the Revolution at all and if it is, it will be _criiiiiiipled_.

[Xanthippe]

I don't have and won't buy an HD TV for some time yet.  I have a good pc, which I plan on replacing in a year or two with a better pc, which is my game machine.  My kids are only 7 and 9, and they have their own computer.

I will get the Revolution.  I will most likely not buy the pricey consoles.

[Dren]

Jamiko has the right of it.  PS2 may have cheaper used games, but I wouldn't want my young kids (all under 7) to play anything on the PS2, nor have they asked to (except for the older son that see the Hulk or other recognizable character on the cover.)

I might sing a different toon in 5 years if my kids want to play more sport games, but for the current generation of consoles and probably the next, Nintendo fits the bill with this respect.

To address the HD controversy:  Not gonna have it nor get it for the next 5 years.  I certainly am not going to speed up that timeline for a console.  My guess is the MAJORITY of console buyers feel the same way.  My feeling is that at this day and time, keeping things simple will net you more of the market.  I certainly could be wrong.

[HaemishM]

You know what? Resident Evil 4 on the Gamecube (with the stated hardware specs on the GC that I didn't know before I played the game) proves it's not what the hardware CAN do, it's what you motherfuckers can do with it. Fuck Hi-Def, fuck RAM, fuck CPU's and GPU's, if you can program RE4 on the tech specs of the Cube, you don't NEED any of that other shit.

Bullshit. When you see RE5 on an Xbox 360 running on a hi-def screen, you'll sing a different song. That probably won't even be ported to the Revolution at all and if it is, it will be _criiiiiiipled_.

And an hour after the shiny is over, if the gameplay don't match, I'll throw it the fuck away. Or trade it in at EB.

Seriously. Price point means more to me than HD. Gameplay means more to me than graphics. I've seen the 360. I'm not impressed.

Of course, Nintendo will really have to prove that nunchuk dongle if it's going to get me to purchase it. But at $150, I've a better chance of buying the Revolution at release than I do the 360 or the PS3.

[Sky]

Fuck Hi-Def

Do you game at 640x480 on your pc? On a 13" monitor?

That's like saying 'Fuck the Model T' because your horse cart has done you just fine for the last eighty generations.

The technology is here, it will be mainstream in a couple years, and it's superior. Stop looking all luddite already ;) HDTVs are flying off the shelves. Even po' folks want them, hell, they especially want them because they need the best matrix they can afford.

Of course the gameplay needs to be there. Who is arguing it doesn't? Of course price point means something. Who says it doesn't? You're just making up arguments, man. That's not like you.

[Jamiko]

I really wonder if HDTV is going to be mainstream in a "couple" of years. Most average Joe's out there, that I know, pretty much avoid technical stuff. They have barely even heard of HDTV. They are aware of flat panel TVs and if HDTV is part of it they would have no idea. They all say they would like a flat panel TV for their next set, provided they cost about the same as "regular" sets. Most of them buy a new TV every 7-10 years. I buy them even less frequently than that and I just had someone give me a 35" Sony console TV. That was a big step up for me and I'm no country bumpkin. I really have no big desire for HDTV, nor plans to buy a new TV any time soon. Why should I? My current set is fine. I bet most people feel the same way. Sure it's cool, lots of expensive things are. But often cool costs too much when fine will do the job.

In my opinion, HDTV will become mainstream when most every TV available is HDTV. But even then, I'm going to be waiting for mine to break down before I buy a new one.

[Samwise]

If you're sitting on the couch ten feet from your TV, HD is going to make much less of a difference.  Resolution matters more on a PC because you're close enough to see the pixels.

[schild]

If you're sitting on the couch ten feet from your TV, HD is going to make much less of a difference.  Resolution matters more on a PC because you're close enough to see the pixels.

Bullshit. Much like most arguments against HDTV.

[Rasix]

I was seriously in the market for an HD tv like a month ago.  Then I started looking at the ones I want.  $2000 minimum.  My life isn't just about me, $2000 is a signficant investment with a minimal return. Sure HD programming looks great, regular programming looked pretty much the fucking same if not worse on most of the sets I looked at.  With a new TV I'd have to take another look at my sound system, I'd need to get a new TV stand that matches the furniture.  I'd probably have to get new cabling done.  I'm afraid at how much more blood the cable company would want.  I figure at least another thousand clams would evaporate within a month.

I'm sticking with my 1 ton, 36" antique someone gave me until the sucker curls up and dies.  My console games look fine and dandy right where they are.  I'll buy a new computer instead.

Price point is really everything at this moment.  The new console(s) are fucking expensive even before you get a goddamn game or two for them.  I'm by no means strapped for cash, I just don't see a decent ROI for what I'd be throwing at it.

[HaemishM]

Fuck Hi-Def

Do you game at 640x480 on your pc? On a 13" monitor?

1024 x 768 on a 17" monitor.

That's like saying 'Fuck the Model T' because your horse cart has done you just fine for the last eighty generations.

If the horse cart still pulls my shit and I can't afford the Model T, fuck Ford in his tiny little asshole.

The technology is here, it will be mainstream in a couple years, and it's superior. Stop looking all luddite already ;) HDTVs are flying off the shelves. Even po' folks want them, hell, they especially want them because they need the best matrix they can afford.

Hey, I want one. I never said I didn't want one. But I'm not going to buy or not buy a console, or dog a console because it doesn't support HD. It's stupider if the Revolution doesn't support DVD playback than if it doesn't have HD.

Here's my beef with HD. It's a fucking scam right now. None of the content providers WANT to provide HD, they are being forced to despite its economic infeasibility. So they provide only what they can, and meanwhile they pimp it like it's the second coming of Bruce Muhame Ali Jesus. It becomes the "got to have it" thing for people who have to be bleeding edge and have money to piss away. Meanwhile, the hardware guys continually tweak the formula to come out with the latest big thing (wait, HD is the bestest, 1 week later wait, DLP is the bestest, 2 weeks later, no no it's PLASMA!). It's like fucking MMOG's. PVP! PVP+! INSTANCING!

And all of it costs about 3 billion times more than the regular, ubiquituous tech I already have. Here's a hint for you. I'm not going to pay $3,000 for a television. I'm not going to $600 for an HD Tivo and an extra $10 a month for HD programming. I'm just not. Sure, it looks great. But today, I'd rather buy more games than I would an HD TV.

2-3 years from now when I'm ready to upgrade my TV to a 32" or bigger? Then, yeah, I'll be fine with HD. It'll also be at a saner price, as opposed to this Mickey Mouse bleeding edge sucker price. There will also be more content, the tech will have time to be stressed and perfected, etc. etc.

I refuse to worry about being bleeding edge when I'd rather eat.

EDIT: The same also goes for bleeding edge video cards. Fuck you Nvidia AND ATI and all you suckers who pay $300 and up for a FUCKING VIDEO CARD.

[Samwise]

If you're sitting on the couch ten feet from your TV, HD is going to make much less of a difference.  Resolution matters more on a PC because you're close enough to see the pixels.

Bullshit. Much like most arguments against HDTV.

Maybe your eyesight is just better than mine.  At the distance between my couch and my computer (which is about the same as the distance between my couch and my TV), I can't tell the difference between 640x480 and 1600x1200.  Shrug.

[schild]

Maybe your eyesight is just better than mine.  At the distance between my couch and my computer (which is about the same as the distance between my couch and my TV), I can't tell the difference between 640x480 and 1600x1200.  Shrug.

Depends on what you're watching. But seriously, that's insane. Play Windwaker or really any Gamecube or Xbox game and then go play any 360 game. There's quite the difference.

[Sky]

It'll also be at a saner price, as opposed to this Mickey Mouse bleeding edge sucker price.

Eh, that was years ago. They're not cheap, but they're not ridiculous. Look at flat panel monitors, a 24" flat panel is what, $1200?

The bleeding edge isn't bleeding when I've had one for over two years now. Folks paying 5 figures...that was early adopter bleeding edge pricing.

I was in the market for a new tv and a new monitor at the same time, both my CRTs were dying. I was able to get a superior product for only a little more than I would have buying both seperately. The difference it's made has been huge, I have no buyer's remorse, and I'm pretty tight with my money.

The rest of the stuff you mention is silly. It's been Plasma, LCD, DLP and LCoS with a smaller CRT market for years now, nothing has changed, though the tech (like all tech) is constantly getting better. OMG there's all those Pentiums but then there is a G5 or an Athlon and now they are trying to pull Athlon FX and 64 on you! Sucker? C'mon, man.

But whatever, rage on. I'll enjoy the model T.

[MrHat]

Haemish is right.

If you buy a new TV in the next 3 years, if you don't buy HD you do yourself a huge dis-service.

The difference to me really is black and white to color.  I can still get quality television on normal stations (Comedy Central).  But I find myself watching pretty much only HD channels now (thankfully, the big 4 and discovery are all HD).  I don't even have HD-HBO or Showtime.

If you want to see the difference RIGHT now, go download some tv shows (Rome is a good one to check out).  Download the HD version, and the non-HD version, and tell me you don't feel the difference.

As far as HD-compatability on the Revo, it doesn't really matter to me.  But it doesn't matter because my TV upscales signals anyways.