Support NeoGAF

[Panajev2001a]

Oh yes, the N64 was VERY hyped for its graphical abilities, I am not saying there wasn't any media hype for it, so don't take it that way. But Nintendo never released specs as in how many polys it could push and the like. That's what I'm referring to.

We will get specs. We will know the mhz speed, they have to release that information for devs. They're talking poly counts and whatnot -- that's Nintendo.

Besides we will know anyway. It's GAF. We'll find leaks.

And Pana: the M2 doesn't count.

Oh poffle-sticks, the M2 always counts. it is like a bottle of good Rose', how can you turn it down at the dinner table ?

 

[Amir0x]

Oh poffle-sticks, the M2 always counts. it is like a bottle of good Rose', how can you turn it down at the dinner table ?

poffle-sticks? :lol

 

[citrus lump]

I bought no "crap", as I only buy quality products. And I don't have money to burn, because if you've been following anything I've posted you know I can't afford PS3 or 360 at 399 - so none for launch. 250 is what I'm waiting for.

Perhaps I'm mistaken. I thought you were Morphix. Not sure where I got that idea.

I apologize.

 

[Kai Dracon]

Under-promise, over-deliver.

And where the Revolution is concerned, is more important to see how the technology is being applied rather than what that technology actually is.

There's a good point here. I'm on the fence though.

On one hand, Nintendo has a point in reaffirming that it's really all about the games and the application of technology, not spec sheet and graphic effect wars. We have all seen those, many of whom are game-makers themselves!, who treat everything as if it's only about specs and graphics, and the game being worthwhile will somehow just take care of itself.

I think there is a need to wrench attention back onto game content and off of hardware and visuals, especially as we inch ever closer to various points of diminishing returns.

On the other hand, the wording of the Nintendo statement is kind of silly and harks back to Nintendo's "WE ARE GAMING" mindset. I'm just imagining right now, poor Reggie being forced to make even vaguer statements about Revolution when asked basic, simple questions, and ending up looking like a marketing tool. I happen to think that Nintendo DOES have a lot of good ideas and viewpoints with regards to gaming, and some of those are ignored by people who are dazzled by bling. So to speak.

And yet, it often seems as if the ghostly Hand of Yamauchi still hangs over the company, tweaking its perception to see itself as the Holy Christ of gaming here to die for the sins of graphic whores and bad games.

They should just say "dudes, it's about the games and interface, not clock speed" and SHOW what they have in development idea-wise, even beyond the TGS teasers, at the same time they quietly roll out the spec sheet and don't make a big deal over hardware comparisons.

 

[Amir0x]

Perhaps I'm mistaken. I thought you were Morphix. Not sure where I got that idea.

I apologize.

Hahaha, no. Even if my mom had won a 20 million dollar lawsuit she would have given me like 10,000 bucks and told me to work hard for my money :lol

 

[DECK'ARD]

They should just say "dudes, it's about the games and interface, not clock speed" and SHOW what they have in development idea-wise, even beyond the TGS teasers, at the same time they quietly roll out the spec sheet and don't make a big deal over hardware comparisons.

I think that's what they plan to do, but obviously it all depends on how far along your games are in development and how far ahead of launch you want to show your potential killer-app. Where Revolution is concerned, the games obviously have to be shown in a playable and stable form to show how the controller is used.

Nintendo releasing a spec-sheet now really wouldn't gain much, if anything. It may upset some internet forums not having this info, but all it would do anyway is just shift the debate from 'how will the controller be used?' to 'it doesn't have enough RAM!' or something. In terms of building anticipation the former is better.

Also, if you play the specs-game you run the risk of getting burnt by over-expectations or people being overly focussed on the technical merits of the launch titles. As Microsoft are finding. I'd really like to see more information out of Nintendo, but frustrating as it is they probably are doing the right thing.

 

[Cosmozone]

"Regarding the specifications, we will probably never 'release' this information as we feel that it is largely irrelevant."

When I was reading the beginning of the thread I was wondering how people could just (deliberately?) overlook the quotation marks in Merrick's comment. It reads like "we'll release them in some way but we're not going to make a fuss about it" to me.

It's quite obvious that they will be known before launch. Knowing them earlier will be interesting, but doesn't help gamers much. Perhaps more time to decide whether to get the thing or not.

I don't think not releasing specs early hurts Nintendo. They've already said the specs are lower than their competition's. Releasing them with a fanfare would just turn off people who prefer to do the easy math.

 

[..pakbeka..]

what a predictable thread

 

[terrene]

I can't believe all these losers flaming amir0x for saying that he wants specs. What are you people talking about? Is it not obvious to you that Nintendo doesn't have good specs and just doesn't want to be exposed to the negative PR of releasing a "less powerful" console?

Quit pretending it's some brilliant way of "focusing on the games" or something. It's just a political dodge, Ari-Fleischer-style. "How may people have been killed in Iraq? Well, let's just look at the results of the war and not focus on things like budget and casualties."

 

[Amir0x]

I can't believe all these losers flaming amir0x for saying that he wants specs. What are you people talking about? Is it not obvious to you that Nintendo doesn't have good specs and just doesn't want to be exposed to the negative PR of releasing a "less powerful" console?

Quit pretending it's some brilliant way of "focusing on the games" or something. It's just a political dodge, Ari-Fleischer-style. "How may people have been killed in Iraq? Well, let's just look at the results of the war and not focus on things like budget and casualties."

Let's not flame the other point of view. If someone wants to flame they'll eventually be pointed out, but some people are discussing this reasonably too.

 

[Flo_Evans]

Stupid. The only people that really care about the specs are crazy people that post on gaming boards, and they are going to find out anyway

What are they trying to hide? We already know its not going to be as powerfull as the x360/PS3. yayaya it's all about the fun... part of the fun for me is reading the specs before a new console launches and dreaming of all the possibilitys.

so, I present the officail nintendo revolution specs:

512 Mushroom shaders - over 100 Funflops of GPU power
256 Nostalgiabits bus
128 floating Pikimin point precision

it will make you say WOW.

 

[Ristamar]

Admittedly, I'm curious about the specs. On the other hand, I'm not a hardware engineer or a game programmer, so beyond the rudimentary basics, I wouldn't really know the potential (or lack thereof) even if I saw the numbers and diagrams. As long as the machine is relatively competent compared to other next-gen consoles and the games are good, I'm satisfied.

 

[Red Scarlet]

I wouldn't even know what the specs mean.

 

[Fafalada]

Just how much greater would the emotional impact of SOTC be with twice the polygon count? or a hundred times?

IMO it would more likely lose a lot of it - because we'd get uglifiedly detailed shiny faces with furshaded hair(did you see the few bits of ICO CG shown on special edition DVD? Eeeeeeeeeech) instead of the somewhat abstract-realism art we have now.
Seriously though, I think Ueda team's games are so high on the scale of interactive aesthetics that using them as example in this argument is a bit unfair. Particularly since in their case - I believe they would create a lot different impact using more hw power then just simple asset upgrading.

How about using some of the technically excellent games that will obviously age badly instead?

Pana you really expect us to believe that you would spend more than a nanosecond debating if you had to choose between Revolution and PS3?

Bah, give me 5 minutes with him and I bet I can make him second guess even his PS3 devotion


Speaking of the topic - Nintendo barely released any real GCN spec to begin with - most of the real stuff came from leaks. Similarly so for NDS. So it's not like this is some big change of tactics.

 

[ninge]

using technically excellent games that will age badly wouldn't help my argument tho would it

 

[Panajev2001a]

using technically excellent games that will age badly wouldn't help my argument tho would it

.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Bah, give me 5 minutes with him and I bet I can make him second guess even his PS3 devotion

Uh... oh...


*runs*

 

[gamergirly]

I can't believe all these losers flaming amir0x for saying that he wants specs. What are you people talking about? Is it not obvious to you that Nintendo doesn't have good specs and just doesn't want to be exposed to the negative PR of releasing a "less powerful" console?

Quit pretending it's some brilliant way of "focusing on the games" or something. It's just a political dodge, Ari-Fleischer-style. "How may people have been killed in Iraq? Well, let's just look at the results of the war and not focus on things like budget and casualties."

Specs are important for the tech savvy and nerdy people. But in the end it's about the games, and whether youre playing a game on a console that has 3 PPUs or 2 dual processor chipsets, as long as the game grabs you, then it doesnt really matter. PS2 will always be the biggest example of this, I havent seen a casual yet that talks about the specs BEFORE the games.

It's almost like "Xbox and Gamecube look better, but who cares? I want a PS2 for that GTA or MGS or Final Fantasy rpg." Nintendo should release the specs out of respect so people can complain and counter-argue to death(and we are potential/real customers anyway), but should they become #1, we'll know that the spec battle didnt mirror the real world. Just like PS2 did over GC and Xbox.

 

[Fafalada]

using technically excellent games that will age badly wouldn't help my argument tho would it

Hehehe touche.
Anyway I generally agree with your points, but I also feel there is a lot more that a team like Ueda's could show us with more hw resources at their disposal.
If I use ICOs example again - there's also some footage of PS1 version that they show on that DVD, and while it looked great for PS1 title, the switch to PS2 undeniably amplified the visual atmosphere alone by a huge amount. Not to even mention other things more hw freedom allowed.

 

[Chittagong]

so, I present the officail nintendo revolution specs:

512 Mushroom shaders - over 100 Funflops of GPU power
256 Nostalgiabits bus
128 floating Pikimin point precision

it will make you say WOW.

:lol

 

[Doom_Bringer]

512 Mushroom shaders - over 100 Funflops of GPU power
256 Nostalgiabits bus
128 floating Pikimin point precision

it will make you say WOW.

hahhaaha that's great!

 

[MadraptorMan]

Specs no matter, fun matter. This say I is the truth. Serico is just a f00.

Seriously though, specs may matter for PC, because developers are not designing any one game for any one system, but on a console like Revolution I think most games will pretty much have to be tailor-made for it anyway. If you are buying a system based on its specs I think that is rather silly.

 

[Coleosis]

If what you say is true Serico, then why is that the Xbox has better specs and most of the games on the Playstation 3 look better. Maybe this is just my opinion, but I don't think visuals are specs are going to make this console next gen. I think they type of online experience you encounter will be what drags more people into buying the console. I like the way PS3 looks but I love the layout of Xbox Live, which is why I have decided on the 360.

Just a thought.

 

[ninge]

Faf - I agree that better hardware canhelp realise a certain vision but i do feel that too many people will be buying a ps3 simply because they think its got the most powerful hardware rather than looking at the games.. which is a shame. I'd much prefer that people bought hardware because it had the games they wanted to play!

Also as a developer I'd still rather write a game for the DS than the PSP despite the much higher capabilities of PSP because the DS just seems more fun to me... which is a shame seeing as its a PSP game im currently working on

 

[winston_pr]

This thread is too long to read through starting now but if it hasn't already been said.

Rolls Royce never reveal the number of horsepowers in their cars. HP specs are refered to as "Enough".

Nintendo are very smart on many levels to not try to position themselves in the current competitive matrix with Sony and MS, but to shift the whole perception of that the category "video gaming" is all about.

AAKER and other marketing gurus have spoken volumes about the potential success of category shifting.

 

[koam]

I'd like to know what I'm buying, the tech behind it or at least the following:

Videocard + speed + ram
CPU type + speed + number of CPUs
total RAM

The rest I don't care/understand/won't remember/don't affect me.

 

[=W=]

I don't really care about this thread even though I read all the way through it, I just wanted to say "Funflops" :lol :lol :lol

 

[Fafalada]

Also as a developer I'd still rather write a game for the DS than the PSP despite the much higher capabilities of PSP because the DS just seems more fun to me... which is a shame seeing as its a PSP game im currently working on

I tend to agree - DS nooks and crannies just seem fun
Granted though, PSP has the VFPU, which does up the interesting factor by a whole lot for me too. If Sony weren't whiny little bitches and let us play with the other CPU (and some other stuff next to it) it would be even more fun though. :|

How long since you started on PSP btw? I got a new toy myself a bit over a month ago.

 

[123rl]

So would any of buy a PC if you didn't know the specs? If the manufacturer just said "It's powerful enough", would you be happy with that? I certainly wouldn't. I don't care about which is more powerful but I'd still like to know what I'm spending money on.

Specs and power aren't the most important thing (design, management and art are all far more important than sheer power) but they are still very important in making new games, especially for a whole generation of a product's life cycle. Anyone who thinks that a slightly more powerful GC is enough to carry a console for the next 7 years is going to be very disappointed.

I want to like Nintendo again but they keep making it so difficult :lol

 

[deadhorse32]

How long since you started on PSP btw? I got a new toy myself a bit over a month ago.

OMG FAFRACER 2 : THE PS3 YEARS

 

[Vieo]

So would any of buy a PC if you didn't know the specs? If the manufacturer just said "It's powerful enough", would you be happy with that? I certainly wouldn't. I don't care about which is more powerful but I'd still like to know what I'm spending money on.

Comparing consoles to pcs is like comparing apples to shoes. Two different things. You need to know what's in a PC so you know if it will meet your needs, which can be one to several things. No one PC is correct for everyone. If you're buying a game console, you only have one need; to play games, or arguably two needs with the first being the same and the second being to play games online.

Instead of being worried about what's inside a console, I'd be more worried about what software will be released for it.

 

[Willy Wanka]

I don't give a shit about the specs. My eyes will do all the comparisons I need.

Having said that I bet Nintendo do release the specs eventually.

 

[Kabuki Waq]

i havent read the thread but im sure someone must ahve mentioned that if the revolution was more powerful im sure NIntendo would be pimping the specs.


Specs do matter I like knowing how powerful and how much potential my system has from a techical standpoint.

 

[ghostlyjoe]

A few things seem pretty obvious at this point:

1. The Revolution will be weaker (in terms of sheer processing power, at least) than the other two. Nintendo has said as much.

2. Specs don't mean as much for consoles as they do for PCs. This is common sense.

3. This is clearly a marketing move. Even if the Rev is a powerhouse (it will be at least as powerful as a high-end PC out of the gate, we can be sure), consumers would probably be turned off by "inferior" numbers. (For example: "It's only got 1 processor?!? The PS3 has 7!! The PS3 is 7 times more powerful!!!). It's the same reason that 2 becomes 360 in the Microsoft camp.

4. 99.9 percent of consumers have no clue what the numbers mean anyway.

5. This is pretty much a non-development in the next-gen race.

 

[Xrenity]

Got the magazine here, what it actually says is more like:
"We don't care if specs never get released"
Like they wouldn't really make them public themselves, but they're fine if they get out somehow.

 

[Ulairi]

No one cares about the numbers other than people who want to talk about things before the games come out. Once games are out, no one talks about what's under the hood.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

I would like to appologize for my short-lived Revolution speculation thread as it seemed to have DEEPLY offended some people. I am sorry. However, I think the questions (though speculative) were valid for discussion and I'd like to post some actual non-bash-DrGAKMAN posts here since it's on topic...

it would be way too expensive to keep the gc internals, and have other cpus and gpus in there as well. since their partners this time around are the exact same ones as with the gc.. even down to the ram providers, it wouldnt be hard to have backwards compatibility ingrained in the revs own chips.

Actually, including the old gecko cpu as a ppu would make a hell lot of sense.
The clock frequency was around 400mhz, which should be more than enough for physics calculation.
Also the bc would be no problem at all.
Might become the truth!

In theory it could, but like quadriplegicjon already mentioned, it's probably a costly method to ensure backwards compatibility for NGC games.

What probably is happening, is that the REV CPU will feature the same feature list as the NGC (It's a RISC processor, given that the REV is the same (most probably) they should have any problems adding a few transistors for those extra functions if they aren't already implemented) but of course expanded and maybe more streamlined.

And Way cheaper as it's on one die

Physics is/can be one of the most computationally intensive aspects of a game.

Anyway, it doesn't make sense to include a Gekko seperately in Rev when I'm sure backwards compatability was one of Nintendo's requirements of Broadway.

I'm glad some good responses are coming in. Assuming no one out there knows the cost of the chipset today, I can't think it'd be that expensive. It's 4 year old technology.

So, IF it's in there, then the logical thing would be to have it help out in some way with REV games, such as handling physics calcs. From what I've read about PPUs, the stress they take off of the CPU is A LOT, so perhaps Nintendo could achieve similar graphics to the competition (or at least the 360) without have to go for a really expensive CPU.

Does that make any sense? I'm sure y'all won't be shy in telling me if it doesn't.

I would expect the new CPU to have a compatibility mode for the gecko. It's a power pc after all.

The fact that they are using the same SDK for the rev indicates that the overall system design would be very similar to the gamecube. When they put in the effort to keep system compatibility, then gamecube games migh just be able to run without the rev housing a mini-gc.

The controller would probably work with a gamecube in theory, I bet the demos at TGS ran on a modified gamecube.

I was merely asking people who knew better than me some down to Earth questions, but I guess open discussion isn't what a message board is for...silly me. And I don't know why some people had to rip on me when other threads/posts are made that proclaim obviously fake specs/reports/rumors as truth!

In closing of my theory on the Revolution having a GCN chipset and/or if that chipset could act as a "helper" to the Broadway proccessor I'd just like to say it was a question...not a proclaimation as to Revolution having a PPU. Going by the responces I quoted above I would say that most likely that the Revolution won't have a GCN chipset due to the fact that Nintendo is using the same partners with Broadway & Hollywood...and even the memory. That and the Revolution case is small, making it more difficult for extra chipsets that would likely be un-needed for GCN BC as the Broadway/Hollywood combo would probably easily handle that task. With less chips there would be less costs, less heat and less of a motherboard footprint needed for the Revolution. It also makes for probably the cheapest/easiest game developement. Plus, for "forward compatibility" it's best to have less chips.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

No one cares about the numbers other than people who want to talk about things before the games come out. Once games are out, no one talks about what's under the hood.

Sure they do!!! It's just more fuel to the fire at what makes the games tick!!

 

[birdchili]

512 Mushroom shaders - over 100 Funflops of GPU power
256 Nostalgiabits bus
128 floating Pikimin point precision

it will make you say WOW.

I was hoping to not have to get into this argument...

100 Funflops isn't *nearly* enough. Didn't "Katamari Damacy - The Drinking Game" get close to that on the PS2???? I'm looking for some "next-gen" numbers here! The new controller is great, but if games are going to bottleneck on Funflops Nintendo is doomed next gen. (Question: Have MS/Sony released Funflops stats for the X360/PS3?)

...and I said "WOW" back when I got my Amiga... lets try and get to the next level here Nintendo!

512 Mushroom shaders is sweet though. I can't wait to see some games that take full advantage of that.

sweet mushroom shaders...

 

[Christberg]

The fact of the matter is, discussions over a console's specs are largely meaningless. Nintendo is 100% correct about this.

Things like clockspeed, number of cores etc. are largely meaningless in the grand scheme of things. At the end of the day, you're going to have 3 different setups that have so little in common that making an apples-apples comparison is going to be pointless at best. Unlike with a PC where you can run the same exact piece of code from one console to the next and observe the results, consoles simply won't have that luxury. In the end you'll have to rely on published performance quotes from manufacturers which will naturally be overblown or distorted in some fashion. "MS engineer says Xbox360 is more powerful than PS3". "Sony engineers ran a testing program that proves the PS3 does 6 jillion petaflops per whosawhatzle". Eventually, we're all going to have to realize that all this junk is really just marketing hyperbole and get down to the truth: it's the games, stupid.

Just like a car going 0-60 in 6.2 seconds vs 6.4 the difference between these things is going to be marginal on a good day, but performance "enthusiasts" who really don't know shit about it will wind up blowing hot air about what a huge difference it is without actually driving the vehicle in question first.

So yeah, it's largely meaningless drivel to me.

 

[xexex]

people seem to forget that in the current generation of consoles, excluding Dreamcast (only counting PS2, GCN, Xbox) that none of them completely outperform / outspec the other two in every area. the Xbox is not more powerful than GCN and PS2 in every way.
The Gamecube is not the weakest.

areas where Gamecube beats Xbox and/or PS2:

amount of L2 cache: 256k
memory latency
standard level of texture filtering: trilinear

i'm sure there are other areas where Gamecube beats PS2/Xbox technically but can't think of them or am not aware but that doesnt mean its not the truth.

now *maybe* Revolution will be weaker than Xbox 360 and PS3 in every area, but I really doubt that.

 

[Amir0x]

Seriously though, specs may matter for PC, because developers are not designing any one game for any one system, but on a console like Revolution I think most games will pretty much have to be tailor-made for it anyway. If you are buying a system based on its specs I think that is rather silly.

No, because the visual experience a system offers is a huge part of the videogame experience. Denying this in any way is the true silly part. That doesn't mean that it's ALL that matters, but it is an essential part of he puzzle. Just because some games are tailor-made doesn't mean they'll look great or comparable either - it depends on the tools you have. Not that's not saying they still won't be fun, or many won't look great. I just want to know what to expect. And shitty videos for Mario 822 won't tell me much at all.

And IIRC, games are most definitely not always tailor-made for the systems. Especially in the case of ports, if you don't have comparable power you're always going to get the short end of the stick. It is a rare day indeed when any gamer who owns all three systems buys a multiplatform game for PS2.

If what you say is true Serico, then why is that the Xbox has better specs and most of the games on the Playstation 3 look better. Maybe this is just my opinion, but I don't think visuals are specs are going to make this console next gen. I think they type of online experience you encounter will be what drags more people into buying the console. I like the way PS3 looks but I love the layout of Xbox Live, which is why I have decided on the 360.

Just a thought.

That's a pretty uninformed decision, because you don't know what the competition is going to offer up yet in terms of online strategy.

This is all part of this discussion. I want to be as informed as possible. Specs are one part of the equation.

Also, I don't understand this: "If what you say is true Serico, then why is that the Xbox has better specs and most of the games on the Playstation 3 look better."

Did you mean Xbox 360? So if you did - Xbox360 doesn't have "better specs". It has specs on par in certain areas, better in some, and worse in others. Overall, though, it's pretty clear that PS3 will have some power advantage, however small. If you meant PS2, then I don't know what you're talking about. Most of the games on Xbox look better

But that's irrelevant. Developers will make the best use of your system. But if they have less tools at their disposal, it becomes more difficult to create compelling visual experiences. I want to know exactly what I'm buying. It's neither silly nor weird; what WOULD be weird is me going blind into a purchase. I don't do that for anything. And although I like Nintendo, they don't get a free pass.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

people seem to forget that in the current generation of consoles, excluding Dreamcast (only counting PS2, GCN, Xbox) that none of them completely outperform / outspec the other two in every area. the Xbox is not more powerful than GCN and PS2 in every way.
The Gamecube is not the weakest.

areas where Gamecube beats Xbox and/or PS2:

amount of L2 cache: 256k
memory latency
standard level of texture filtering: trilinear

i'm sure there are other areas where Gamecube beats PS2/Xbox technically but can't think of them or am not aware but that doesnt mean its not the truth.

now *maybe* Revolution will be weaker than Xbox 360 and PS3 in every area, but I really doubt that.

Good post. I think GCN also had the best load times and could do 8 layers of textures per system pass. I think Revolution will be more of the same...clean/simple architecture with less power overall, but very good performance. I think Nintendo is confident in waiting to show games and downplaying graphics 'cos they have some exclussive feature(s) like that cube-mapping idea.

Revolution will be an improvement over or continuation of GCN in alot of areas I believe:
-load times
-60fps
-higher capacity discs
-more 1T-SRAM on-chip memory
-more overall memory
-480p
-5.1 Dolby

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Amir0x...
Your always dogging me for my long-winded speculation, but your long-winded rants about "waaaaa...I want Revolution specs" aren't constructive or informative at all. They're not going to tell us right now, so why whine about something you can't control? They don't wanna show games until people can play them...and most likely they don't wanna give specs until after they show the games 'cos they're going for an action speaks louder than words approach.

You can go on and on about specs 'til you're blue in the face, but did PS2 outspec X-BOX & GCN...no...yet it get's the most support, most games and some technically impressive looking games despite it's lower specs. You're right that the talent & tools are big factors in how games turn out, but I'd say that those are even more important than any specs.

Performance is better than some specsheet IMO...and Nintendo pretty much waiting to show the games or any specs is telling me that they believe overall performance (visually, technically & gameplay wise) is more important than some numbers.

 

[Amir0x]

Amir0x...
Your always dogging me for my long-winded speculation, but your long-winded rants about "waaaaa...I want Revolution specs" aren't constructive or informative at all. They're not going to tell us right now, so why whine about something you can't control? They don't wanna show games until people can play them...and most likely they don't wanna give specs until after they show the games 'cos they're going for an action speaks louder than words approach.

Performance is better than some specsheet IMO...and Nintendo pretty much waiting to show the games or any specs is telling me that they believe overall performance (visually, technically & gameplay wise) is more important than some numbers

Actually, they're not "rants." They're discussions about actual FACTS. You know, shit we KNOW to be true at the moment. But hey! I prefer to keep myself grounded.

They don't wanna show specs because they have something to hide, period. There is literally no other possible explanation. Which is why it makes me MORE skeptical to just jump into a purchase like this, especially because it has a radical control scheme I may or may not like. I have to know all aspects of this system, because it walks new ground.

Naturally, I don't really expect to 'get through to you'; you have more unfounded faith in Nintendo than anyone else on these boards. I like Nintendo, but I'm a true gamer. I know why I play games, I know what's important, and I don't give any company a free pass. I don't give a fuck what they believe they can do in terms of performance, I only care that I want to see specs so I can judge what the future performance will be like.

 

[Drinky Crow]

well, they COULD be keeping mum on the specs just to emphasize that the Revolution isn't in line with the "traditional" consoles and is something else entirely.

Which would be fair IF:

A) it actually WAS radically different, which outside of controls, it ISN'T

-and-

B) I didn't know the specs actually COULD be used to make 'em look bad

so d'oh!

 

[goomba]

A) it actually WAS radically different, which outside of controls, it ISN'T

Youve played the rev then?

 

[Drinky Crow]

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question.

 

[goomba]

I'll assume that's a rhetorical question.

Indeed, you have not played the rev, so how could you know that it isnt "radically different outside controls"?.

 

[fresquito]

Sounds like typical Nintendo to me: Keep the public in the dark about their product but somehow expect them to line up in droves.

Like showing the specs will enlighten too much. I mean... how many paople will understand them? 0,000000001% of world population?

Consoles aren´t about speciphics, but about games.