Not really that impressive. It looks fine and unlike the PS3 or Xbox isn't trying to wow your pants. Still hoping it's not the real deal though.
[quote]Revolution will be "two-to-three times more powerful than GameCube," according to Nintendo, which also acknowledges that the next-generation race isn't solely about new technologies. By contrast, Microsoft's Xbox 360 console is 13-15 times more powerful than the first, according to the publisher. And Sony says it's PlayStation 3 is roughly 35 times more powerful than PlayStation 2.
That just won me over. I'm not really excited about the next gen at all. Having games look as realistic as some of the Xbox 360 previews have is a real turn-off for me. I like the technologies just the way they are right now.
'course that's just me.
Likewise. I don't know why, but when I play a game, I want it to look like a game. Not a Pixar movie. Not real life. I want detail, not realism.
i like it, i guess. i would have liked it more if there was a little more to it. it's really plain.
gosh, it really does look like a cd-drive and nothing more. i wonder what the huge surprise, if any, will be.
From the conference I just watched, I wasn't amazed, but they have managed to keep my interests. It seems to offer quite a bit. Instant Online play when launched, backward compaditblity (nes, snes, n64, gc), and who knows what the hell the contorllers are going to look like. The design of the Revolution itself is simple...and does it really matter that much(as long as it's not huge, which it isn't). So yeah, I was overall pleased with Nintendo thus far...although I would have liked if they at least had a demo of a game or two...even if it was in video form. Ah well, we shall see what they have in store starting tomarrow. :)
seriously, the whole conf. seemed more focused on the **** gameboy and gamecube rather than the revolution. i want revolution!
Posted by boomstick
Quoting Uchiha Itachi: seriously, the whole conf. seemed more focused on the **** gameboy and gamecube rather than the revolution. i want revolution!
Yeah, I would have liked to at least see some Revolution footage, hopefully we'll se some on the floor.
Posted by nichif the revolution they showed is only a prototype and they're not even sure what it will look like in the end, how much footage do you think there is available to be shown?
Posted by brownoystercultnot my fault. i expected them to be prepared and actually show off their next-gen system.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: not my fault. i expected them to be prepared and actually show off their next-gen system.
Uhh... the release is around a year away. Do you really expect them to be fully prepared and done with the system? Of course not. What they gave us is all we could really hope for.
Anywho, with SSB WiFi at launch, I have no choice but to buy the system.
Posted by Prince Shondronai
Ha! Controller ports, as I said. Screw wireless right in its non-existant port!
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: Ha! Controller ports, as I said. Screw wireless right in its non-existant port!
It's been confirmed to be wireless.
Posted by Madame FlurrieSeeing as the Revolution is backwards compatible with the Gamecube, those could just as easily be ports for GCN controllers. And they could also be the ports for wireless controller recievers, seeing as the Wavebird has a reciever that plugs into a controller port on the Gamecube.
Though it's nice to know where the controller ports and memory card slots are on the Revolution. :)
Posted by Dark Bulb 4.3Like Vamp said, SSB with WiFI. Screw every other system. I'm getting this first, and my controller will go in the port. Wireless controllers and smash don't mix.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: Seeing as the Revolution is backwards compatible with the Gamecube, those could just as easily be ports for GCN controllers.
You genius, you.
Quoted post: And they could also be the ports for wireless controller recievers, seeing as the Wavebird has a reciever that plugs into a controller port on the Gamecube.
For some reason I doubt the controllers will have recievers. Though it may be something like the 360 where you can use cords when the batteries die.
Posted by HyperYeah, just because there's ports doesn't mean they have to be used.
Posted by KlarthThose look like GCN controller ports to me. That hints at backwards compatability.
Also: I'm surprised none of you are speculating at the thing's real name yet. It's not gonna be called "Revolution".
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: It's not gonna be called "Revolution".
I like it though :( Espcially now that I've seen the logo. What with the big disk as the first o and the little on as the second... cute :(
Anywho, Super GameRectangle.
Posted by Vampiro V. EmpireI thought I'd post something interesting. Of course it's based on a pile of speculation, but anyone that enjoys conspiracy theories, you're going to love this:
http://nintendonow.com/index.php?categoryid=5&m_articles_articleid=2635&PHPSESSID=c24344b74ec2f9bf72f944edbc92841c
Pretty long read, but also pretty cool.
Edit: Also, don't know if you can trust Cube-Europe (Never got any news from them before), but, according to them, the official name of the console will be Revolution, and if not that, Revolution System (RS). They also claim that the 3-4 times more powerful thing was a huge error (don't know how this mistake was made), it will, infact, be just as powerful as the competitors.
Quoting http://www.cube-europe.com/news.php?nid=7774: Turns out 'Revolution' may be more than just a codename...
With less than half an hour until Nintendo's E3 conference begins, reputable site Club Skill are reporting that 'Revolution' (previously thought to be a prototype name for Nintendo's next home console) will in fact be the official name; either in that form or as "Revolution System" (RS). If this is true, it is very surprising news.
The article also claims that details published earlier in the day about the console's meagre power (in comparison with PS3 and Xbox360) were errorous, and that it will sport technical prowess on its competitors' level. This, at least, would be welcome news.
Stay tuned for confirmation of this news, and more, in the next hour or so.
take it for what it's worth
Posted by nichi've never heard of them before but if their sources are right then YES! the little amount of power anounced was a little bit of a let down. I hope this article is right.
Posted by Big Boss
Quoting Madame Flurrie: Why is everyone so disappointed? It doesn't matter if the system has more power than HAL 9000, what matters are the games! And considering Nintendo announced backwards compatibility with not only the GCN but with the NES, SNES and N64, not to mention talk of Super Smash Bros as a launch title, I'm rather impressed. ;)
Oh... but you don't know how many possibilities from a game design standpoint you'd have with a machine like the PS3. You don't even have to make a realistic game. It's just the possibilities of gameplay. Graphics would not just be graphics. FMV-quality backdrops will actually be interactive as they'd be part of a runtime program, not the work of an animator. A fight scene with dozens and dozens of enemies with their own attacks and behavioral patterns without worrying about cutting down the animation or detail for frame rate purposes. Power translates to the ability to enhance a gaming experience from every single point, not just visual.
And, seriously, for those of you that are turned off by realistic looking, high-tech games, there's always the SNES and NES available. Why are you bothering to discuss about any system that's come out since after the Dreamcast?
Posted by Legend Saber
Quoting Big Boss: Oh... but you don't know how many possibilities from a game design standpoint you'd have with a machine like the PS3. You don't even have to make a realistic game. It's just the possibilities of gameplay. Graphics would not just be graphics. FMV-quality backdrops will actually be interactive as they'd be part of a runtime program, not the work of an animator. A fight scene with dozens and dozens of enemies with their own attacks and behavioral patterns without worrying about cutting down the animation or detail for frame rate purposes. Power translates to the ability to enhance a gaming experience from every single point, not just visual.
The problem I feel with that is, some of these next-gen games are going to be so detailed that we'll be dealing with Playstation 4 by the time they get finished. Consoles are getting too powerful, too fast, I mean, you can have all the power in the world, but if your developers have no way to utilize it, it's useless. I think Nintendo made the right move by making the console only a few times more powerful than their current console, this saves space, money, time, and manpower. And besides, I predict that only the biggest names in the industry (Square Enix, Electonic Arts, maybe Rockstar) will be able to use what the PS3 and XBox 360 are promising to their maximum extent. Almost all other companies simply lack the manpower to make such detailed games.
Posted by Speedfreak
Quoting Big Boss]They're not just "updating the graphics." And no, Revolution won't be able to do what the PS3 can do at its maximum power in terms of gameplay.
Posted by Alastor
Quoting Big Boss]in terms of gameplay.[/color]
Go on then, elaborate.
Hell, I'll save you the trouble, lets take it as granted that half the PS3s games will be pushing the console well past what the other 2 can attain, even if they were toned down. Revolution will still be able to do plenty of things PS3 cannot simply because of it's interface. IN this ficticious world, they'll be evenly matched.
But the fact is, they won't be pushing the PS3. They won't be creating game world the size of planet Earth, because there's just no point. It would take too long and players wouldn't explore all of it anyway (nevermind that you could just split it into sections and load each one seperately). They won't be making Battle of Endor fights with 4,000,000 TIE fighters (nevermind that there were less than that in the Battle of Endor anyway) because *******it, no one wants to fight against 4,000,000 TIE fighters. Nor 300 bad guys at the same time. PS3 has a ridiculous amount of power, most of which will be used for superficial purposes. Mechanics-wise, past the 2Ghz mark CPU power just stops mattering for something like games. Yes, in theory you could make much more complex games on PS3, but they're not going to because they want to appeal to mass market.
Posted by Last FogA couple people said that it won't actually be called Revolution. So what about this? Just curious.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v229/lastfog/rev.jpg[/IMG]
Posted by Morag2Last Fog, your image isn't showing up... is that just my computer? I'm assuming Revolution is just a codename... remember Nintendo Dolphin a.k.a. Nintendo Gamecube. I wish they would keep it though... revolution is a sweet name.
Thank you, it is now showing up... and I see your point... it says Revolution right on the side.. perhaps this is just a prototype to show at E3?
Posted by nichspeedfreak i agree wholeheartedly. who the hell wants to play a never-ending game? it might be cool in some instances, but i feel a certain sense of accomplishment when i beat a game in reasonable amount of time, you get more out of the experience that way. If they made a super huge rpg world like the one in .hack//sign (anybody know what im talking about?) then maybe id say all that power is well worth it.
Posted by Big Boss
Quoting Alastor: Feh... biased opinion.
We were discussing if the hardware capacity of the PS3 allowed for more gameplay possibilities than what Revolution was capable of. In other words, we were talking about potential. It's not a biased opinion, but an informed fact from someone that's currently studying the subject from a programmer point of view. See, unlike the PS2, the PS3 doesn't use assembly language to write its games, which was what made it hard to develop for. It uses C and C++ tools, which is what developers are trained to program with, which in turn means the possibility of tapping the potential of the PS3 is much more possible than it was for the PS2 (And that answers your question, Speedfreak).
The fictional portion comes from whether or not developers will tap that potential, but we'll just have to wait for that. However, all I've talked about is potential, so read what I said next time before your biased stance clowds your vision.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: A couple people said that it won't actually be called Revolution. So what about this? Just curious.
A prototype of the final system. Source being right from Iwata's (him right?) moth at their conference. That could be the final name for all we know, but chances are it won't. Plus, they could slap any name they want onto the prototype and it won't matter since it's not what they will actually use.
Posted by brownoystercult
Quoting Vampiro: Uhh... the release is around a year away. Do you really expect them to be fully prepared and done with the system? Of course not. What they gave us is all we could really hope for.
i never said that they had to be done with the entire system, but at least show more than the console itself.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: i never said that they had to be done with the entire system, but at least show more than the console itself.
It's Nintendo. You should be used to this by now...
Posted by brownoystercultheh, not really. i wasn't into the E3 all last year and the year before. i don't really know anything about nintendo so i guess comparing it to the sony press conference was a mistake. last year is when i started to really actually get into gaming so i don't know all to much about the other systems. im still young, so i have yet to seen what these companies truly have to offer!
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: heh, not really. i wasn't into the E3 all last year and the year before. i don't really know anything about nintendo so i guess comparing it to the sony press conference was a mistake. last year is when i started to really actually get into gaming so i don't know all to much about the other systems. im still young, so i have yet to seen what these companies truly have to offer!
By watching the conferences you pretty much discover what ever company is like.
Nintendo is just a paranoid company though. They think everyone is out to steal there ideas (which some are, Metroid Prime HUD for example), so they keep tight-lipped about everything. Which in the end hurts them, but they think blabing everything will hurt them more. Who knows who's right. You actually really never get used ot there silentness. You always expect them to reveal everything, because you want them to, but they never do. Instead they like to tease, as seen with Twilight Princess.
Posted by Black_Wolf
Quoting Majesty: Likewise. I don't know why, but when I play a game, I want it to look like a game. Not a Pixar movie. Not real life. I want detail, not realism.
I would think that one would achieve realism through detail.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: I would think that one would achieve realism through detail.
You can have great detail through very gamish graphics. For example Wind Waker. Tons of little deatils, yet, about as far way as reality as you can get.
Detailing has nothing to do with reality. It's just a different kind of detail.
Posted by Prince ShondronaiIndeed. It was quite a different song bb was singing when sony was on the bottom of the technology pile.
Posted by ResidentialEvilWell others can celebrate about getting a bunch of old NES and SNES titles, but I seriously doubt that is going to sell a lot of systems. If that's only a small part of the equation, then fine. But we've all seen Nintendo's reliance on the past for a good while now, and I think if they are banking on this "Downloand any Nintendo game from the past" to sell their systems, they are dumber than I thought. Sure the Nintendo "fanboys" will go for it, but the majority of the market will not.
Anyway, so far this is pretty disappointing news. It sounds like Nintendo is merely making a system that catches up to THIS generation. But I'll hold out final judgement until the E3 is over because if the power thing turns out to be false (which I really hope) then I'll feel better.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: It sounds like Nintendo is merely making a system that catches up to THIS generation
Fhe?
Posted by Aioros
Quoting ResidentialEvil: Well others can celebrate about getting a bunch of old NES and SNES titles, but I seriously doubt that is going to sell a lot of systems. If that's only a small part of the equation, then fine. But we've all seen Nintendo's reliance on the past for a good while now, and I think if they are banking on this "Downloand any Nintendo game from the past" to sell their systems, they are dumber than I thought. Sure the Nintendo "fanboys" will go for it, but the majority of the market will not.
[COLOR=Yellow]I disagree. Along with Smash Bros as a launch title, the downloadable catalog of Nes, Snes, and N64 games is the best thing they have going for them at the moment. It will probably be Revolution's selling point at least until they show some next-gen titles or what the controller looks like.[/COLOR]
Posted by Richaodhttp://www.nintendo.com.au/nintendo/news/index.php is good.
Hehe, I was hoping the new one would have full backwards compatibility. And the downloads and everything just sound fantastic.
Posted by Iron ManPlus its availible in different colors..
They got a vomit colored Revolution..yuck. White and Black seem to the most attractive looking colors IMO.
Posted by Soul_TassadarI feel like I am the only one who understands nintendo's vision. I really am becoming ****ed off with the worlds youth. Back with atari, and nintendo, graphics didn't matter, FUN mattered, and it seems like fun is begining to wane. Nintendo, in my opinion, is doing what they need to, the revolution looks very promising, and I will be first in line to buy one.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: Back with atari, and nintendo, graphics didn't matter
Back in those days, there basically was no suck thing as graphics.
But you must understand, technology is changing, it shapes society and the way we experience things. Thus, as much as I do understand Nintendo's vision, and love the idea, they can't base everything on fun anymore. There's only going to be a fraction of gamers that will truly appreciate what Nintendo is trying to do, and you can't do business on a fraction. What they need to understand is technology is not the bane of fun. The two can enjoy a happy marriage and add to the overall experience.
Back in the day, the lack of (good (today's)) graphics allowed for this sort of thing to happen, and that's great. Plenty of those games were some of the most fun I've ever played. But that just isn't possible now. They have tons of money, they have the ability to use the best of the best when it comes to technology, so by ***, use it.
Point is, I'm still getting one.
Posted by Soul_TassadarI understand where you are coming from, but another problom with graphics is that developers are going to have alot of trouble making good games for it. I believe CliffyB said it takes 6weeks for 1 enemy character model to be designed. Thats insaine.
Posted by FateOr thorough. These days, games require more time. I would hate to find my enemy's only scary point was the horrendous clashing of pixels.
Posted by Speedfreak
Quoting Big Boss]hitload of things game-wise that the other two couldn't do, but it wouldn't matter because those kind of things would only matter to the supreme hardcore player. Games next-gen are going to cost too much to make to appeal to the ultra-hardcore, so they're not going to spend that power on mega-game mechanics because they actually want to make money, they'll spend that power on graphics instead.
So I put this question to you, sir. What kind of game mechanics with mass-market appeal could only be done on PS3? You've got all the time you want to answer it.
Posted by Bebop
Quoting Aioros: [COLOR=Yellow]It will probably be Revolution's selling point at least until they show some next-gen titles or what the controller looks like.[/COLOR]
Or how about what it actually can do?
Posted by powerpuff
Quoting Iron Man: Plus its availible in different colors..
They got a vomit colored Revolution..yuck. White and Black seem to the most attractive looking colors IMO.
I want the red one
Posted by Prince ShondronaiI'll be getting the white one, myself, unless they come up with a more Link-like green than that.
Posted by Big Boss
Quoting Speedfreak: Actually, you didn't.
I asked what kind of gameplay mechanics a machine like PS3 could handle that the other 2 systems wouldn't. Then I answered it myself, openly admitting that PS3 could do a shitload of things game-wise that the other two couldn't do, but it wouldn't matter because those kind of things would only matter to the supreme hardcore player. Games next-gen are going to cost too much to make to appeal to the ultra-hardcore, so they're not going to spend that power on mega-game mechanics because they actually want to make money, they'll spend that power on graphics instead.
So I put this question to you, sir. What kind of game mechanics with mass-market appeal could only be done on PS3? You've got all the time you want to answer it.
You're assuming companies will spend the great power of the PS3 on graphics alone. You're forgetting there's a Capcom, a Konami and a Square out there that explore the advantages of a system for gameplay purposes, and just imagining what can be expected from these game-loving companies when they get time to work with the PS3 is enough to assume there WILL be games that take advantage of the PS3's power for gameplay purposes in a level unmatchable by its competitors.
Posted by SpeedfreakWell thanks for answering my question. :rolleyes:
Posted by Big Boss
Quoting Speedfreak: Well thanks for answering my question. :rolleyes:
*sigh*
You just said you agreed the PS3 could do things gamewise the others two could not, right? Right? Good. Agreed. Done. Then you said that didn't matter because game companies aren't going to spend money on using that power to do things only the PS3 can gamewise, to which I disagreed by saying game companies like Capcom would, in fact, work their game development magic to use all the PS3 capabilities to make the best games possible.
You also said that amount of power would only matter to the very hardcore gamer... um... so? Do you know of the huge culture of MMO fans around the world? Do you know their level of commitment to games, and their incredibly huge numbers? Evercrack? The PS3 has the possibility to smoothly handle a next-gen MMO for consoles that could actually compete spec-wise with any PC one (or even surpass it), bringing more popularity to the genre in the market. But you talk about mass market? Need I remind you that the most popular franchise on the planet is about recreating a lifelike world, such as the one depicted by the Grand Theft Auto series? And what system would be the most capable one of recreating the biggest, most realistic GTA world? Imagine such a huge world created by Rockstar thanks to the power only the PS3 has, using a system that can handle any new gameplay mechanics and environmental interaction without sacrificing any other part of the game. I'd say the PS3's frightfully high capabilities can be exploited for both the hardcore and "mass-market" gamer.
Does that answer your question?
Posted by buddha
Quoting Majesty: Likewise. I don't know why, but when I play a game, I want it to look like a game. Not a Pixar movie. Not real life. I want detail, not realism.
I understand how you feel but if you play more fantasy based games like platformers or rpg's etc. im sure you will much rather realistic graphics.Playing games with realistic graphics doesent mean games themselves will in any way turn in relation to real life.You will still play little childish games and old mature games only with the result of you becoming more immersed in the experience as a result of modern technology.Scary games will most brnefit from the graphical upgrade anyway,thats for sure.imagine playing silent hill with no difference between graphics and real life! ...........makes me feel all fuzzy inside.
Posted by saiyanknight
Quoting Big Boss]
Does that answer your question?[/color]
True, very true, but how many 3rd party companies are going to come forward and say " We will make you a MMO Game " Not too many will actualy create a amazing online game, i will just let you play Smash Bros Online, and you will pretty much be doubting everything you said, as we all know, Nintendo do their job at making fun games, but remember, Experience pwns Noobs at something brand new, like if you had a forum, you could add to it,but if you had a multi-modded, uniquely interfaced, and pure coding, (C & C++ in Sony's terms) then which could add something good with?
Consider it
Posted by Morag2I think the Ps3 will have better graphics are larger games like Big Boss is saying, however I think Revolution will be more fun. I'm gonna buy SSB3 with online and a big bag of grocery's, and I'll vanish into my room and nobody will hear from me for months. Years even. I'll come out sometime in the 2200's to find that SSB48 is out in virtual reality and people press buttons on their watchs and warp around...
Posted by Speedfreak
Quoting Big Boss]
Does that answer your question?[/color]
Nice example, too bad I already voided it before you mentioned it, huh?
[quote]They won't be creating game world the size of planet Earth, because there's just no point. It would take too long and players wouldn't explore all of it anyway (nevermind that you could just split it into sections and load each one seperately).
And yes, you answered my question. Not only that, but you proved my point. Well done and thank you.
Posted by cool gamer dadIt looks like my modem. :cool:
I'll just have to wait and see if I can afford one. :(
Posted by Prince ShondronaiWhat would be revolutionary about downloading old Nintendo games to your shiny new system? Wi-Fi online play for all multiplayer. Everything from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Arcade on the NES to Super Smash Brothers on the N64, online.
But Prince, you say. You couldn't care less about online play, remember? That's right. I couldn't. Everyone else seems to, though, so I thought I'd mention it. Smash Brothers and New Tetris online, however, I would be all over.
Posted by Big Boss
Quoting Speedfreak: And yes, you answered my question. Not only that, but you proved my point. Well done and thank you.
You voided it with your uneducated opinion. You said they couldn't create Earth 'cause it'd be worthless. What kind of example is that? Rockstar created a whole freakin' state in the PS2. What's stopping them from expanding to more states, and make each more interactive and varied? It's not more work, because the technology now allows for it. Developing costs will increase, and some of that will be made up by an increase in game prices. Having such a huge place loadtime-free would be priceless, too. Sounds like a pretty feasible idea to me, and again, it could not be done in any other system more effectively than on the PS3. Now stop speaking for developers.
Posted by SpeedfreakMy point was that the world could be done on Revolution. Maybe not load-time free, but hell, Nintendo load times (ie about 2 seconds) won't be a bother anyway.
Besides that, Xbox 360 could probably do it too, considering both systems share the same amount of RAM, which is kinda crucial for huge worlds. Caching on the hard drive would also solve the problem.
Besides, I regard the difference between loadtime-free and half second loadtimes as "superficial" anyway.
Posted by Captain FlintI'm pretty stoked about it, but kinda worried about the price. It has quite a bit of features so it's probably gonna be around $200+.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: It has quite a bit of features so it's probably gonna be around $200+.
Pff, I wish. I'm sure we all wish it to be two-hundred.
Posted by Captain FlintWell it's kinda stupid to be selling it for $300 or higher.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: Well it's kinda stupid to be selling it for $300 or higher.
Is it? Do you know how much money it takes to make a console? Do you realize how much money they lose selling it at, even, $400? It's not stupid, their just trying to lessen their loses really. Of course, you have the flip side, like the up coming PS3 which is being said to seel around $500. That's way to much for your average gamer, but, like the PS2 demostarted, if people want it, people'll get it.
Posted by Captain FlintYes, but that's the point 'the average gamer'. And it does take alot of money to make a console, but where is the 'average gamer' gonna get the money? I can understand it might be a great console, but it better be in an "understandable" price range or the 'average gamer' wont be able to afford it. After all 'average gamers' are a big part of game companies profits.
Posted by Morag2I wish it would be $200, $300 is more accurate though, if even that cheap... I've heard that the graphics chip in the ps3 has a market value of $1000 dollars. I'm assuming sony will get a deal on it but still, I bet there all going to be losing money.
Posted by saiyanknightokay il tell you this, the Revolution will most likely cost around $200, maybe cheaper, because nintendo have said that they want it to appeal to everybody, and they said almost everybody will be able to buy it, also, they said they want a mass-market appeal, if they say that they wont be seeling it around $500, whereas PS3 is going to cost around $500-600 which kinda sux....
Posted by AxisI'm not sure it will cost as low as 200. May'be around $250, at least that's my guess.
Posted by ShadeWhen I first saw a picture of the Revolution, my first thought was, "Oh boy! Another internet router!" Oh wait, it's the Revolution. Which I think, looks pretty darn cool with the whole glowing disc slot thing going on. Or at least, it looks like it's glowing. :\
I think that the Revolution will be in the $200-$250 range. And if the PS3 is $500, then I'll have to start saving up. The Rev will probably be my second choice for a system.
Posted by Morag2You really think it will only be $250? If the Ps3 is twice as much won't that be terrible for it's sales? I thought they would be within $150 dollars... but then again I didn't buy my gamecube until 4 years after it's release so I know zip about release prices.
Posted by Captain FlintIf $300 will be most surely the highest price, I can live with that.
Posted by Shanuti AborinaI believe it to be around the
Posted by RandomI believe ur probably wrong :-P After seeing that EB Games and Gamestop both believe that the XBox 360 and PS3 will release at a solid price of $499.99, I highly doubt the Revolution will be cheaper then $300. That is unless they went super cheap but then that would make it rather crapish. Yes I know good vocabulary ^_^...
I think Nintendo will go all out and put a lot on the line and try to impress the world with their next console. I bet it's at least $350 but then again we know just about nothing about the Revolution. All we have is pictures and thats all we can give in details about it. We can't give games or anything else.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: After seeing that EB Games and Gamestop both believe that the XBox 360 and PS3 will release at a solid price of $499.99
EB and GS don't know any more than we do at this point.
Posted by RandomRight but it's estimated price with all the hardware unless they decide to go higher.
Posted by TendoAddicttheirs two points I would like to make
1) I hope you realize that the whole nes , snes, n64 backwards capatibility is not what makes the revolution revolutionary. We dont know what it is. It could be a flop or be so revolutionary it makes the ps3 look like a uninspired junk heap. If nintendo were to show what is revolutionary about the revolution other companys could steal it.
Which brings me to point 2
2) Nintendo has every right to be secreative about its technology. People has taken nintendos inovations and used it. Think this is BS. Its not
Remember rumble packs? The n64 controler was the first controler to use this. Now low and behold every controler has the rumble feature.
And remember the Wave bird? First wire-less controler ever. Now the whole next gen is wire-less.
Oviously nintendo believes that the revolution may be a victim of this
Posted by Prince ShondronaiActually, I own the first wireless controller ever, which is an oversized NES pad that runs on AA batteries and only works when it's pointed directly at the receiver.
As for rumble paks and the analog stick, that was all Nintendo, yes.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: Actually, I own the first wireless controller ever, which is an oversized NES pad that runs on AA batteries and only works when it's pointed directly at the receiver.
As for rumble paks and the analog stick, that was all Nintendo, yes.
I believe wireless and analogure first started on the 5200.
Posted by Prince ShondronaiThe joysticks on Atari's systems were digital, not analog. Show me some wireless Atari controllers, if they exist.
Posted by SpeedfreakI heard analog sticks were done on the commodor 64, but I could be completely wrong.
EDIT: Oh, wait, that's a joystick. Wow, guess Nintendo do actually have good reason to be worried.
Also on their list of innovations:
Shoulder buttons
D-Pads
Hand grips (I think, anyway, the virtual boy controller is the oldest I've seen with prongs).
They basically invented 90% of a Sony controller :p
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: I heard analog sticks were done on the commodor 64, but I could be completely wrong.
First console analog stick was either the 5200 or Vectrex.
And PCs had them before that, both IBM-compatible and non-compatible.
Posted by SpeedfreakCoarse just said they were digital :p
Posted by Prince ShondronaiIndeed. If my ex-girlfriend hadn't stolen all of my Atari sticks when she decided to become a lying, scheming, manipulative female dog one day, I could show you the insides. They just look like big D-pads on the circuit boards. Arcade controls used only 4 switches, except for Midway's NFL Blitz/Gauntlet Legends sticks, which came after the N64 anyway.
Posted by buddhayou dont place n64,snes or nes games in the console you download them with broadband which is built innto the console
Posted by Dark Bulb 4.3
Quoting buddha: you dont place n64,snes or nes games in the console you download them with broadband which is built innto the console
Thanks, I didn't know that :)
DUMBASS
Posted by BurritoAt least we know that they are going to show what makes the revolution revolutionary before the end of the year. They might hold a spaceworld. Which I really hope happens.
Posted by PocoI'm gettign the Revolution solely to play the old SNES games, if you can do it, as some people said. Screw everything new. Seriously.
Posted by Last Fog
Quoting Commisar Yarrick: I'm gettign the Revolution solely to play the old SNES games, if you can do it, as some people said. Screw everything new. Seriously.
Yeah, right. Who in their right mind would spend several hundred dollars on a new console just to play SNES game. Don't you already have a SNES? Even if you don't, there's something called an emulator.
Posted by NightmareBassXMan... Some of the posts I've seen dissapoint me. First of all, 1) Most games are about fun, you claim that people care more about graphics, But do you? What do you consider? Who cares what other people think. 2) To me i'd play any game, as long as its fun, and keeps me occupied, And they claim ps3 is 35 times better as nintendo is only 3? I think thats bull****, I dont think Ps3 is going to be that great. Don't get me wrong, I think ps3 is going to be a great system, I just think Nintendo won't dissapoint.
The day I got my gamecube, was the day I got SSBM, and that was one of the happiest days of my life. It was so much fun, I could not stop. Now being that the revolution will have online play and be 3 times better (Supposedly), SSB for the Revolution... I can't even explain the excitement in my heart... I could care less what other people Speculate over the revolution. I just wish those people could feel what I feel. SSBM was one of the best, maybe Thee best game for the Nintendo Gamecube, and it was one of the first out. I may be talking to much of the SSB's titles for the Revolution, But think of what else it can do, Metroid, Mario, Other classical titles...Or even new titles, new characters, and maybe a new way of gameplay, Something new. Im not trying to say the Revolution is going to be better then PS3, Im just trying to say its going to be just as great. It may not have as much power, But I know it will be a great system and there is no way it will dissapoint me. You might find most of my post maybe pointless, and ignorant, but as I said before, I don't care what other people think about the Revolution, I know it will be good in my eye's, I just want it to be good in yours. We all have are opinions.
It looks like im trying to say none of you have confidence in the Revolution, And I apologize for my ignorance. I just wish some of you can be more Optimistic about it. I hate how some people want to point out which systems are better because it leads to pointless conflicts that will lead to nothing but doubt. The Playstation 3, Revolution, and Xbox 360 will all be great systems, there is no doubt, some of you speculate which will be better then the other and thats ok, but in fact, they are all great systems, and that can't be argued over. Again, if you think my post is totally inaccurate and you beleive my speculation over some of you is wrong, I apologize.
Posted by Bebop
Quoting Last Fog: Yeah, right. Who in their right mind would spend several hundred dollars on a new console just to play SNES game. Don't you already have a SNES? Even if you don't, there's something called an emulator.
But does he have an emulator for the NES and n64? Can his PC run an n64 emualtor easily? Does he have a controller? Or does it make more sense to get a revoltuion and have instant access?
Posted by Last Fog
Quoting Bebop: But does he have an emulator for the NES and n64? Can his PC run an n64 emualtor easily? Does he have a controller? Or does it make more sense to get a revoltuion and have instant access?
Makes more sense to get an emulator and get instant access.
He said nothing about N64. He wants it just for SNES or older. Pretty much any computer can run a SNES emulator. Buy a controller for 10 bucks, you're set.
Or... you could wait several months for the Revolution, pay a few hundred bucks... yea...
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: He said nothing about N64. He wants it just for SNES or older. Pretty much any computer can run a SNES emulator. Buy a controller for 10 bucks, you're set.
GC and back. That would include the 64.
Posted by Last Fog
Quoting Vampiro: GC and back. That would include the 64.
I was only responding to Poco. Yes, I know GC and back. But he said Snes only.
"I'm gettign the Revolution solely to play the old SNES games, if you can do it, as some people said. Screw everything new. Seriously."
Posted by NightmareBassX
Quoting Commisar Yarrick: I'm gettign the Revolution solely to play the old SNES games, if you can do it, as some people said. Screw everything new. Seriously.
He was only refering to the Snes only, So he didn't include Nes or 64.
Posted by BurritoThere's something more satisfying about playing the games legally on your TV, with a nintendo made controller. It's different than using an emulator.
Posted by Prince ShondronaiI wonder if the GBA link will work and allow you to download SNES games to your GBA like the bonus features of some GAMECUBE games do, or even just use your GBA as a controller. That'd be cool.
Posted by Poco
Quoting Last Fog: Yeah, right. Who in their right mind would spend several hundred dollars on a new console just to play SNES game. Don't you already have a SNES? Even if you don't, there's something called an emulator.
I play on emulators, but it would definantly feel better to play it on the nintendo console. I'd probably download some N64 and NES stuff,too.
EDIT: I may have a computer from late 2003, but N64 roms are to hard to find, and a hassle to run on a keyboard(even with my playstation-USB connection), and it can't run NES stuff correctly.
Posted by NightmareBassXI think the Nintendo controller adds to the whole expierance. I used to have an emulator but got rid of it since its just... Not as fun. I couldn't do wall jumps on Megaman X3 since if I pressed to many keys it wouldnt respond.
Posted by powerpuff
Quoting Prince Shondronai: I wonder if the GBA link will work and allow you to download SNES games to your GBA like the bonus features of some GAMECUBE games do, or even just use your GBA as a controller. That'd be cool.
since it has gamecube controller slots maybe you could hook up your gameboy
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: since it has gamecube controller slots maybe you could hook up your gameboy
HORI Controller :D
Posted by dustbunny08the nintendo stinks compared to the other systems
Posted by AxisShut up. Don't even post if you're going to make arrogant statements like that.
Posted by NightmareBassX
Quoting Dyers Eve: Shut up. Don't even post if you're going to make arrogant statements like that.
Well said.
Posted by Shanuti Aborina
Quoting dustbunny08: the nintendo stinks compared to the other systems
You know, these forums used to be good... Then Morons started playing video games -_-
Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHS
Quoting Vampiro: HORI Controller :D
Dude, awesome.
Posted by Shade
Quoting nintendorules!: You know, these forums used to be good... Then Morons started playing video games -_-
Like you? Yeah, I thought so.
You guys don't need to take him so seriously. Jeez, apparently one stupid statement merits universal dislike and a nuclear bomb of negative rep. He's probably just a 10 year old who happens to hate Nintendo.
Posted by Dreamcast-Jackthis forum is Nintendo bias tho, I am in fact looking forward to revolution.. but you guys have pretty much all the boards for Nintendo and no Sega boards..yeah Fan Boy Board for sure..
Posted by SpeedfreakThat's because the demand for Nintendo boards is greater. No one wants to talk about Sega systems. It isn't done out of spite.
Posted by Vampiro V. Empire
Quoted post: no Sega boards
There's also no Konami or Capcom board, what's your point?
What you're looking for is "Other Systems"
Posted by ShadeOr Virtual Boy. Go ahead and post any crap in there.
Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHSI wouldn't. last time I was there Ferry was a hard-***. :)
It WAS about three years ago, though.
Posted by Dreamcast-Jackwell maybe the NES/SNES should just be in Other Systems as well..and Virtual Boy..give me a break... Pathetic it even was considered having its own board... Genesis has more of a reason to be up than Virtual Boy. I'm I'm sorry people play other consoles besides Nintendo's
Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHSActually, we did have a Genesis/Mega Drive and Dreamcast board, a while ago. I assume it was taken down when Sega got out of consoles. Which was actually a long time ago, come to think of it.
And Nintendo has had so many more systems than Sony or Microsoft put together. It makes sense that there would be more boards. Heck, Nintendo has more systems out RIGHT NOW that Sony and Microsoft put together.
And neither of the other two main players have as much of a retro following as Nintendo. Neither does Sega, as a matter of fact. You hear more people remeniscing about Kid Icarus than you do about Alex Kidd, for example.
The boards are there for those specific subjects because people want to talk about them. If the Other Systems board started having a lot of Genesis talk, without being at the expense of other subjects, then I'm sure a Genesis board would be reinstated. But otherwise just go and chat in the boards provided for those systems that aren't current, or don't get enough attention to warrant a full board.
The Virtual Boy board is there because it's actually a very popular machine amongst cultists. Ferry (the mod) runs a VB site, and that's his board. And it's been here forEVER.
Don't come here and tell us how to run this place. This is what we do. And how we do it.
Posted by Shanuti Aborina
Quoting Shade: Like you? Yeah, I thought so.
So you'd rather have some 10 year old that posts biased, un-supported comments rather than someone that at least TRIES to back up his statements. Sheez.
Posted by Last Fog
Quoting nintendorules!: So you'd rather have some 10 year old that posts biased, un-supported comments rather than someone that at least TRIES to back up his statements. Sheez.
I'm sorry, but I missed the part where you even TRIED to back up your biased comment that anyone who doesn't like the revolution is a moron.
Posted by Shanuti Aborina
Quoting Last Fog: I'm sorry, but I missed the part where you even TRIED to back up your biased comment that anyone who doesn't like the revolution is a moron.
Tell me WHEN I said anyone that hates the Revolution is a moron. I get annoyed when People don't back up their opinions. Posting 'Nintendo Stinks' is a stupid, arrogant, unsupported post. I wasn't calling anyone that hates revolution a moron, but people that post 1 line saying something completely useless and they don't even bother to back it up.
I know maybe I shouldn't have posted that, so now I apologize, but I stand by the fact that I strongly disagree with everything about that post. 