• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

The OFFICIAL Tech Spec-ulation thread! Will the Revolution be weakest?

MightyHedgehog said:
If Nintendo reveals very nice-looking Revolution games, like a new Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Super Smash Bros., etc. ... would it matter if the system was, in fact, the 'weakest' of the three?

Exactly. So many people say the GC is "underpowered" but it has great looking games like RE4 (fillrate saving widescreen taken into consideration) and all the Rogue Leader games. They easily stack up to the other two consoles.
 
There's always advances in other technology, do anyone here know what advancements have been made in CPU cooling technology today.

Of course, we are applying advances in technology. But when you use those advances just to boost the processing power, the trade-off is that you increase power consumption, make the machine more expensive and make developing games more expensive. When I look at the balance of that trade-off -- what you gain and what you lose -- I don't think it's good. Nintendo is applying the benefits of advanced technology, but we're using it to make our machines more power-efficient, quieter and faster to start. And we're making a brand-new user interface. I think that way of thinking is the biggest difference.

I thought that not including a harddrive and 15 connections for different media devices, no Blue Ray or HD-DVD disc. How about using their proprietary storage media, its obvious the media their using is the same as the GC disc, just in a larger format. Wouldn't make their console cheaper to manufacture, which in turn benefit the consumer.

I'm getting image in my head of a Newsweek columnist getting a early look at the Revolution console design, assuming that the console will not be capable of displaying HD resolutions because he didn't see a HDMI or DVI connection on the back of the console.

I think its amazing a what company can acheive when you have billions of dollars to spend on R&D.

And still noone here finds it strange Perrin Kaplan made a comment that contradicts Miyamoto, who said they have yet to lock down any specs based on real world. performance
 
OG_Original Gamer said:
Yeah, post more just a lame quote, so people don't take things out of context.
"When Nintendo introduced its next console, the Revolution, it avoided talking about specifications, but implicitly conceded that the machine might be less technically impressive than its competitors.

"It has the power of a Ferrari, and they are talking about Saturn rockets," said Mr. Iwata, referring to the three consoles. "But we are traveling on earth."

Instead of superior technology, he said, Nintendo would set itself apart as it has in the past, with imaginative games."
There you have it, NOT out of context.

Nothing new here move along.
 
Efficiency and in-game performance seems to be Nintendo's hardware design philsophy ever since the N64 debacle. I am guessing given that Nintendo has teamed up with the same hardware partners (IBM, ATI, MoSys) the Rev. will be a souped up Gamecube, there's nothing wrong with that, given that they address the RAM shortage that GC suffered from.

Honestly, I think that the graphics difference between the console in the next gen will be smaller, much smaller than this gen (and it was only obvious to hardcore players even this gen, seriously, how many casuals could pick out the graphical difference between Prince of Persia across all three platforms?). Look at the consoles with announced specs so far (PS3 and XBox 360), a hardware generation gap of at most 6 months, a gpu clock cycle difference of 50 mhz, multi core CPUs for both, same amount of RAM....and people are declaring victory for one console or other based on just that? It's just insane. I am willing to bet good money that it will be close to impossible for casuals to pick out any significant graphical differences between Xbox 360 and PS3 unless they know specifically what to look for. Now, one area where Nintendo will be hurt is in the perception wars, since they refuse to play that game they will be hurt in the mind of the public, without a doubt. But they seem to have accepted that, that said, if they can at least provide an equivalent amount of RAM and follow the same hardware design philosophy that they did for the GC the Rev. versions of major third party games should look near identical to their XBox 360 and PS3 counterparts.
 
The Quote did not need context, but here is the article for those who refuse to use bugmenot.com:

A Video Match: The Nintendogs vs. Gangs, Thugs and Wars

By ROBERT LEVINE

At the Electronics Entertainment Expo in Los Angeles last week, the demonstration booth for Nintendo seemed like an island of innocence amid the retorts of digitized gunfire.

While most game publishers showed sequels, sports simulations and shooting games based on grim tropes such as gang violence and World War II, Nintendo was promoting, among other games, Nintendogs. It lets players raise and train virtual pets on the Nintendo DS, the dual-screen hand-held game machine released last year.

Developed by Shigeru Miyamoto, who created the Mario Brothers and Legend of Zelda franchises, Nintendogs is exactly the kind of game the company is known for: addictive, odd and more than a little cute. Nintendo's Game Boy and DS systems dominate the market for hand-held games, and it just announced that it would introduce Game Boy Micro, a sleek, pocket-size machine, this fall.

But the focus at the expo was on the console business, where Nintendo lags. In part because of its image as a console for children, Nintendo's GameCube has only 20 percent of the market in the United States, trailing the PlayStation 2 from Sony by a large margin and the Xbox from Microsoft by a smaller one, according to the NPD group, a market research firm.

"It is not sufficient when it comes to market share," said Satoru Iwata, the president of Nintendo, speaking through a translator in an interview. "But market share is not everything; think about profitability."

For the last two fiscal years, Nintendo's operating margin has been about 25 percent, according to the company. Sony's games business is profitable, but Microsoft's has lost money.

Last week, Sony unveiled its PlayStation 3 and Microsoft showed off its Xbox 360, both of which will feature high-definition video and impressive processing power.

When Nintendo introduced its next console, the Revolution, it avoided talking about specifications, but implicitly conceded that the machine might be less technically impressive than its competitors.

"It has the power of a Ferrari, and they are talking about Saturn rockets," said Mr. Iwata, referring to the three consoles. "But we are traveling on earth."

Instead of superior technology, he said, Nintendo would set itself apart as it has in the past, with imaginative games. The company is the second-largest game seller in the United States, behind Electronic Arts. But that advantage could be hard to maintain as consumer tastes change. Over the last five years, Mario has lost market share to the thugs of Grand Theft Auto as the audience for video games has gotten older and the games themselves have moved into the mainstream of pop culture.

The Revolution will move Nintendo even farther away from the other two console makers. Both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 represent components of a parent company's master media plan. Sony's console, for example, will use the proprietary Blu-ray DVD format.

Nintendo is interested only in selling games, and the Revolution will need an extra attachment even to play regular DVD's. However, Revolution will play classic Nintendo games from the 80's and 90's that will be available for downloading, including Super Mario Brothers and Metroid.

"They're bobbing while everyone else is weaving," said Scott Steinberg, a vice president of Sega America, which makes games for all consoles. "They've always been about family entertainment, not just technology."

But even with its own popular titles, Nintendo will need support from such outside game makers. It will have to convince them that it can maintain enough market share to make their products viable. Some games, such as the 2K Sports series, are made only for PlayStation and Xbox.

"For a company like Activision, it's less about the market share and more about the economic model," said Kathy Vrabeck, president of Activision Publishing. The question, she said, was whether it made sense to release titles on a third console. "To date, on our older skewing titles for hardcore gamers, the answer is: yes, it is."

Hit games are crucial to console sales. "This is an industry where younger consumers aspire up," said Reggie Fils-Aime, executive vice president of sales and marketing at Nintendo of America, and any machine seen as a mere toy could be shunned. He pointed out that releases like "The Legend of Zelda" appealed to hardcore gamers in their 20's and 30's, some of whom played the early games when they were children.

"I think we were unfairly pigeonholed as a child's system, and I don't think we successfully challenged that," he said. He wants to expand Nintendo's market share by drawing in people who aren't traditional gamers with products that are not traditional games. One recent GameCube title, "Donkey Konga," came with a set of bongo drums that players had to hit in time to music and cues on-screen.

"They're really pushing innovation in game play," said J Allard, who oversees the Xbox business for Microsoft. "But they didn't reveal enough about Revolution for me to have an opinion."

In effect, Nintendo is betting that the games of the future will not demand more power than the Revolution delivers, according to Michael Pachter, a research analyst at Wedbush Morgan Securities. "But I think they're wrong. It's a macho business." Even so, he said, he was impressed with the creativity of Nintendogs, which he described as brilliant.

It would seem that Nintendo's products are aimed at the child in all of us. At the end of the interview, Mr. Iwata took out a Nintendo DS running a product in development, in which math equations ran up the screen and players had to solve them quickly. The software will be able to track players' scores over the course of a day, week or month.

"My mother is playing with this now," Mr. Iwata said. "I think Nintendo is the only publisher in the world that is willing to make this kind of application."
 
OG_Original Gamer said:
Who said that, I demand to know?

PERRIN KEPLIN(SP?) so again, i don't think nintendo has a clear idea of what their doing. the way it looks right now, Reggie wants to paint a image that the revolution is the hottest thing, has the best tech, is cool to show off while you have sex or masturbate to it and etc... while NOJ wants to paint a image that is not the tech that sells or graphics but is the games that sells the system.
 
When Nintendo introduced its next console, the Revolution, it avoided talking about specifications, but implicitly conceded that the machine might be less technically impressive than its competitors.

"It has the power of a Ferrari, and they are talking about Saturn rockets," said Mr. Iwata, referring to the three consoles. "But we are traveling on earth."
Actually, sounds to me like the author misinterpreted this quote. Rather than "implicitly conceding" anything, it seems Iwata's actually commenting more generally on peaked out PR spec wars with the Ferrari/rockets comparison. "But we are traveling on earth" seems like a dead giveaway in that direction, he's been pushing that "we'll be honest" ideology in all his interviews.
 
kIdMuScLe said:
PERRIN KEPLIN(SP?) so again, i don't think nintendo has a clear idea of what their doing. the way it looks right now, Reggie wants to paint a image that the revolution is the hottest thing, has the best tech, is cool to show off while you have sex or masturbate to it and etc... while NOJ wants to paint a image that is not the tech that sells or graphics but is the games that sells the system.


I didn't know she is so tech savy.
 
jarrod said:
Actually, sounds to me like the author misinterpreted this quote. Rather than "implicitly conceding" anything, it seems Iwata's actually commenting more generally on peaked out PR spec wars with the Ferrari/rockets comparison. "But we are traveling on earth" seems like a dead giveaway in that direction, he's been pushing that "we'll be honest" ideology in all his interviews.

I tend to agree with you.


If I worked with nintendo, I would suggest that they make a console as powerfull as the xbox 360, so there weren't be any problems for ports.
 
I just got Warioware Twisted, and it is a breath of fresh air. Tilting is so damn fun. If the Revolution can bring more unique game experiences like this, I wouldn't be concerned if it's the weakest specs wise.
 
My concerns with power is not to just be on par with their competitors in the visual department.

but to have enough power to explore different styles of design and expand.

I dont want a developer to decide not to create the next resident evil or killer 7 on the rev because he feels the system isnt powerful enough. It's unique games like that... that truly make gaming on nintendo systems to me worthwhile (aside from nintendo games themselves... of course).
 
I'd like to jump in here and point out the fact that Perrin Kaplan is a woman.
 
1: Numbers given by MS and SONY are bullshit.
2: We were shown "realtime" demos. Not games.
3: Nintendo doesn't shit around about numbers, so don't expect it to compete ON PAPER.
4: IBM is making the CPU. While we have no idea what the architecture / specs of the CPU will be, you can be guaranteed it will be made right.
5: ATI is making the GPU. It'll be done right. (this is NOT an nVidia vs ATI thing, it's about experience making parts for consoles and other closed systems.)
6: MoSys 1T-SRAM. Fastest. RAM. Ever. It's just a question of how much.

That's basically what we know. It looks to be fine.
The big questions are in what we don't know.

DVD playback? Or with "attachment"?
Hard Drive? - 512MB flash storage is great for saves and downloaded games and random shit. But it won't hold people's MP3s, and you won't speed up load times with that...
Load times? WHat type of disc will they use? It's a standard 12cm disc. DVD? Perhaps. HD-DVD? Maybe. Blu-Ray? No. Nintendo's own format that is physically the same as another format, but has a different data structure to prevent piracy? Bingo. The capacity is the question though... 1.5 GB proved to be limiting in some cases on the GC.
Sound? I fully expect Nintendo to go with full 5.1. However, I expect the competition to go with 7.1.
HD? I expect a yes.
And on, and on.

There is so much that isn't known. I really fucking hate Nintendo for not showing more stuff. But honestly, did you see the piece of SHIT Sony came up with for the controller? The longer it takes for Nintendo to show their hand, the longer it will be before SONY rips off their design.

As far as power - it does matter. XBOX really did pick up steam over the last year and a half. Remember - we're gonna be looking at HD (almost certainly) That's 1920 by 1080, compared to 640 by 480. That's 6.75 times the resolution just to keep up in terms of graphics quality. And then you expect an increase in graphics quality?

I have no doubt that all of the next gen systems will be technically capable and will be able to handle amazing things. But they are most certainly not magical. There will be limitations.
Itagaki ran to XBOX because he wanted to render some extra tit and ass jiggle on his lame ass button masher. The sad thing is people like his fucking games. And all the other games that are shit to play, but draw in the hordes of drunken frat fucks by being sexy, cool, or having a new fucking end zone dance.

Fuck. I'm more worried about the content of games than I am about their technical prowess.
I'd gladly trade in every fucking 3D model, every fucking texture, just to get the "mainstream" (fucktard) gamers away from my fucking hobby. This is why I still play Tetris, or Pacman, or etc. They're great games, and nothing has come along that will replace them. I don't give a fuck if Halo3 has triple wielding with your cock as some hologram dances naked with her lesbian sorority girls over Live! I don't want a fucking stadium where each fan in attendance is unique. I DON'T WANT ANY MORE WWII GAMES.

Fuck. All I can see for this next generation is more of the shit I hate. And once in a while osmething I like. I personally hope there is another crash in the market. I don't want to ever see another Madden game. I want ALL of EA to burn to the ground. I want the 95% of the industry that SUCKS and caters to "mainstream" gamers with recycled CRAP over and over to die.

Am I just ranting? Or will this happen? This is exactly why Nintendo wants to stay away form the tech race. Developers simply put out rehashed crap when they get more power. Nintendo is predicting that people will stop buying it. Nintendo is promising to try something new.
While, sadly, I think people WILL keep buying the crap that's put in front of them, I also think that there will be enough of a userbase to keep Nintendo profitable. I think there will be enough people who get tired of the crap to make the Revolution successful.

As far as I can tell

1 The Revolution isn't about making games with more tech.
2 The Revolution isn't about shunning new tech.
3 The Revolution is about making games with new ideas.
4 The Revolution is about making games without the limitations of old tech. (BUT SEE 1)

Basically - Revolution will probably be able to compete tech-wise, but it will certainly not be the top dog. This WILL matter for the majority of shit developers with their shit games, and this will lead to a bunch of morons buying their shit, and not Nintendo's. However, Nintendo should still be able to be very successful.
 
Arguing about specs is about the dumbest thing there is. Arguing about specs when there are none, takes the fucking cake.
 
8BALL said:
1: Numbers given by MS and SONY are bullshit.
2: We were shown "realtime" demos. Not games.
3: Nintendo doesn't shit around about numbers, so don't expect it to compete ON PAPER.
4: IBM is making the CPU. While we have no idea what the architecture / specs of the CPU will be, you can be guaranteed it will be made right.
5: ATI is making the GPU. It'll be done right. (this is NOT an nVidia vs ATI thing, it's about experience making parts for consoles and other closed systems.)
6: MoSys 1T-SRAM. Fastest. RAM. Ever. It's just a question of how much.

That's basically what we know. It looks to be fine.
The big questions are in what we don't know.

DVD playback? Or with "attachment"?
Hard Drive? - 512MB flash storage is great for saves and downloaded games and random shit. But it won't hold people's MP3s, and you won't speed up load times with that...
Load times? WHat type of disc will they use? It's a standard 12cm disc. DVD? Perhaps. HD-DVD? Maybe. Blu-Ray? No. Nintendo's own format that is physically the same as another format, but has a different data structure to prevent piracy? Bingo. The capacity is the question though... 1.5 GB proved to be limiting in some cases on the GC.
Sound? I fully expect Nintendo to go with full 5.1. However, I expect the competition to go with 7.1.
HD? I expect a yes.
And on, and on.

There is so much that isn't known. I really fucking hate Nintendo for not showing more stuff. But honestly, did you see the piece of SHIT Sony came up with for the controller? The longer it takes for Nintendo to show their hand, the longer it will be before SONY rips off their design.

As far as power - it does matter. XBOX really did pick up steam over the last year and a half. Remember - we're gonna be looking at HD (almost certainly) That's 1920 by 1080, compared to 640 by 480. That's 6.75 times the resolution just to keep up in terms of graphics quality. And then you expect an increase in graphics quality?

I have no doubt that all of the next gen systems will be technically capable and will be able to handle amazing things. But they are most certainly not magical. There will be limitations.
Itagaki ran to XBOX because he wanted to render some extra tit and ass jiggle on his lame ass button masher. The sad thing is people like his fucking games. And all the other games that are shit to play, but draw in the hordes of drunken frat fucks by being sexy, cool, or having a new fucking end zone dance.

Fuck. I'm more worried about the content of games than I am about their technical prowess.
I'd gladly trade in every fucking 3D model, every fucking texture, just to get the "mainstream" (fucktard) gamers away from my fucking hobby. This is why I still play Tetris, or Pacman, or etc. They're great games, and nothing has come along that will replace them. I don't give a fuck if Halo3 has triple wielding with your cock as some hologram dances naked with her lesbian sorority girls over Live! I don't want a fucking stadium where each fan in attendance is unique. I DON'T WANT ANY MORE WWII GAMES.

Fuck. All I can see for this next generation is more of the shit I hate. And once in a while osmething I like. I personally hope there is another crash in the market. I don't want to ever see another Madden game. I want ALL of EA to burn to the ground. I want the 95% of the industry that SUCKS and caters to "mainstream" gamers with recycled CRAP over and over to die.

Am I just ranting? Or will this happen? This is exactly why Nintendo wants to stay away form the tech race. Developers simply put out rehashed crap when they get more power. Nintendo is predicting that people will stop buying it. Nintendo is promising to try something new.
While, sadly, I think people WILL keep buying the crap that's put in front of them, I also think that there will be enough of a userbase to keep Nintendo profitable. I think there will be enough people who get tired of the crap to make the Revolution successful.

As far as I can tell

1 The Revolution isn't about making games with more tech.
2 The Revolution isn't about shunning new tech.
3 The Revolution is about making games with new ideas.
4 The Revolution is about making games without the limitations of old tech. (BUT SEE 1)

Basically - Revolution will probably be able to compete tech-wise, but it will certainly not be the top dog. This WILL matter for the majority of shit developers with their shit games, and this will lead to a bunch of morons buying their shit, and not Nintendo's. However, Nintendo should still be able to be very successful.

How do you figure that it's going to matter for just the shit developers? If anything, it'll matter for the small, creative developers. And just because they're small doesn't make them shit. Atlus and Monolith Soft, though small, have produced some awesome games.
 
LiquidMrM said:
Conservative Nintendo : When you will see the graphics, you will say wow.
Conservative Nintendo : Tech-wise the Revolution will be on par with the competition.
Conservative Nintendo : Rev will be 2 to 3 times faster than Gamecube.

Yeah, Nintendo is conservative.

LiquidMrM said:
Sony: PS3 1% as powerful as human brain.

Sony didn't say this.

LiquidMrM said:
Sony : PS2 will be able to produce life-like realistic graphics and be used to launch missiles.

Was it ever proven that Sony leaked this, or was it always just assumed by certain people? It's ridiculous news either way, but I don't want to just assign guilt to a party without evidence. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

LiquidMrM said:
GC, despite it's small size, blows PS2 out of the water and is on par with big ass XBOX.

It also came out a year after PS2. Like Xbox. And "blows out of the water" is not a phrase I'd use to describe any of the current gen systems in relation to each other. "Sufficiently outperforms" is better.
 
Son of Godzilla said:
I think from now on all processing power should be measured in gamecubes.


Shaheed79 said:
It already is right now I'm runnin a 25cbhz(Cubahertz) GPU.

14_EnergonCubesSoundblasterGalvatronSixshot.jpg

e-cube.gif


That's the first thing I thought off.
 
Why can't you all just play the games you have now and take your minds off thinking if you'll be disappointed by a system's specs or not?
 
Suite Pee said:
Why can't you all just play the games you have now and take your minds off thinking if you'll be disappointed by a system's specs or not?

Because this is the GAF. Console gaming is just as much about image as it is about games.
 
Drensch said:
Arguing about specs is about the dumbest thing there is. Arguing about specs when there are none, takes the fucking cake.
Yup.

the article said:
Mr. Iwata took out a Nintendo DS running a product in development, in which math equations ran up the screen and players had to solve them quickly. The software will be able to track players' scores over the course of a day, week or month.

"My mother is playing with this now," Mr. Iwata said
A "game" which is the videogame equivalent of flashcards will be played by Iwata's mother, and no one else. I couldn't agree more that what REALLY matters is how good the games are...but if that's true, why is Nintendo pushing so many pieces of software which are NOT games?
 
Hahahaha!

Games don't sell systems anymore!

Its the tech that counts! Hoorays for the power!
Hopefully in the future they'll stop making games all together and just ship out really swank demo's that'll show how awesome our machines are.

:-P
 
-jinx- said:
Yup.


A "game" which is the videogame equivalent of flashcards will be played by Iwata's mother, and no one else. I couldn't agree more that what REALLY matters is how good the games are...but if that's true, why is Nintendo pushing so many pieces of software which are NOT games?

If you think about it Nintendo and MS are kinda doing the same thing. MS specifically said in their E3 PC that they want non / lite gamers on Live; the whole watch a DVD and get a IM on the X360 thing + their Arcade product and Nintendo is producing non mainstream games to widen it's audience. I'm not sure what SONY is doing to target these people but as non market leaders, the two companies are looking at every avenue to broaden market share. I think they both have great ideas as long as it doesn't come at the cost of alienating the hardcore.
 
-jinx- said:
A "game" which is the videogame equivalent of flashcards will be played by Iwata's mother, and no one else. I couldn't agree more that what REALLY matters is how good the games are...but if that's true, why is Nintendo pushing so many pieces of software which are NOT games?

What criterion is being used to decide what a game is? Maybe it's just me, but it seems like any experince that is simulated and is either rule based or is a closed system could fall under the term. I don't see anything wrong with this example, or with something like Electoplankton. But that's just me--I'm not up on the debate and have no idea how others categorize this stuff.
 
The size is the issue. You can't expect to be competitive with Sony and MS on power without employing enough silicon to do the job. And all that silicon needs to be cooled. So there's no way to keep that small form factor and power at the same time. The only way would be if they managed to launch at 65nm for both CPU and GPU, which would be phenomenal. But even then, I'd expect active cooling, and from the sounds of it, they won't be able to do that, or won't want to. They'll want some passive cooling to make the device truly portable and portability kinda requires silence too. PEACE.
 
Pimpwerx said:
The size is the issue. You can't expect to be competitive with Sony and MS on power without employing enough silicon to do the job. And all that silicon needs to be cooled. So there's no way to keep that small form factor and power at the same time. The only way would be if they managed to launch at 65nm for both CPU and GPU, which would be phenomenal. But even then, I'd expect active cooling, and from the sounds of it, they won't be able to do that, or won't want to. They'll want some passive cooling to make the device truly portable and portability kinda requires silence too. PEACE.

I have to ask, but based on your knowledge. What advances have been made developing cooling systems for CPU's and GPU's. I'm not talking about the PC stuff, or do you think MS,Sony, and Nintendo are limited to whats available from the PC market.?

Can you please provide some facts to backed this up?

MMmmmm.......billions of dollars to invest in R&D towards creating a solution.
 
8BALL said:
1: Numbers given by MS and SONY are bullshit.
2: We were shown "realtime" demos. Not games.
3: Nintendo doesn't shit around about numbers, so don't expect it to compete ON PAPER.
4: IBM is making the CPU. While we have no idea what the architecture / specs of the CPU will be, you can be guaranteed it will be made right.
5: ATI is making the GPU. It'll be done right. (this is NOT an nVidia vs ATI thing, it's about experience making parts for consoles and other closed systems.)
6: MoSys 1T-SRAM. Fastest. RAM. Ever. It's just a question of how much.

That's basically what we know. It looks to be fine.
The big questions are in what we don't know.

DVD playback? Or with "attachment"?
Hard Drive? - 512MB flash storage is great for saves and downloaded games and random shit. But it won't hold people's MP3s, and you won't speed up load times with that...
Load times? WHat type of disc will they use? It's a standard 12cm disc. DVD? Perhaps. HD-DVD? Maybe. Blu-Ray? No. Nintendo's own format that is physically the same as another format, but has a different data structure to prevent piracy? Bingo. The capacity is the question though... 1.5 GB proved to be limiting in some cases on the GC.
Sound? I fully expect Nintendo to go with full 5.1. However, I expect the competition to go with 7.1.
HD? I expect a yes.
And on, and on.

There is so much that isn't known. I really fucking hate Nintendo for not showing more stuff. But honestly, did you see the piece of SHIT Sony came up with for the controller? The longer it takes for Nintendo to show their hand, the longer it will be before SONY rips off their design.

As far as power - it does matter. XBOX really did pick up steam over the last year and a half. Remember - we're gonna be looking at HD (almost certainly) That's 1920 by 1080, compared to 640 by 480. That's 6.75 times the resolution just to keep up in terms of graphics quality. And then you expect an increase in graphics quality?

I have no doubt that all of the next gen systems will be technically capable and will be able to handle amazing things. But they are most certainly not magical. There will be limitations.
Itagaki ran to XBOX because he wanted to render some extra tit and ass jiggle on his lame ass button masher. The sad thing is people like his fucking games. And all the other games that are shit to play, but draw in the hordes of drunken frat fucks by being sexy, cool, or having a new fucking end zone dance.

Fuck. I'm more worried about the content of games than I am about their technical prowess.
I'd gladly trade in every fucking 3D model, every fucking texture, just to get the "mainstream" (fucktard) gamers away from my fucking hobby. This is why I still play Tetris, or Pacman, or etc. They're great games, and nothing has come along that will replace them. I don't give a fuck if Halo3 has triple wielding with your cock as some hologram dances naked with her lesbian sorority girls over Live! I don't want a fucking stadium where each fan in attendance is unique. I DON'T WANT ANY MORE WWII GAMES.

Fuck. All I can see for this next generation is more of the shit I hate. And once in a while osmething I like. I personally hope there is another crash in the market. I don't want to ever see another Madden game. I want ALL of EA to burn to the ground. I want the 95% of the industry that SUCKS and caters to "mainstream" gamers with recycled CRAP over and over to die.

Am I just ranting? Or will this happen? This is exactly why Nintendo wants to stay away form the tech race. Developers simply put out rehashed crap when they get more power. Nintendo is predicting that people will stop buying it. Nintendo is promising to try something new.
While, sadly, I think people WILL keep buying the crap that's put in front of them, I also think that there will be enough of a userbase to keep Nintendo profitable. I think there will be enough people who get tired of the crap to make the Revolution successful.

As far as I can tell

1 The Revolution isn't about making games with more tech.
2 The Revolution isn't about shunning new tech.
3 The Revolution is about making games with new ideas.
4 The Revolution is about making games without the limitations of old tech. (BUT SEE 1)

Basically - Revolution will probably be able to compete tech-wise, but it will certainly not be the top dog. This WILL matter for the majority of shit developers with their shit games, and this will lead to a bunch of morons buying their shit, and not Nintendo's. However, Nintendo should still be able to be very successful.

I must say, this is one of the most wildly irrational posts I've read since joining GAF. Congrats.
 
OG_Original Gamer said:
I have to ask, but based on your knowledge. What advances have been made developing cooling systems for CPU's and GPU's. I'm not talking about the PC stuff, or do you think MS,Sony, and Nintendo are limited to whats available from the PC market.?

Can you please provide some facts to backed this up?

MMmmmm.......billions of dollars to invest in R&D towards creating a solution.
Huh? You need active cooling for the PS3 and 360 chips, and probably RAM sinks for the RAM...maybe. I don't know if RAM still gets super-hot like my old GF Pro card did. But unless Nintendo gets 65nm chips (smaller and lower voltage, so cooler), then I just can't see them matching those chips without active cooling (fansink). Now if the portability thing holds up, then maybe they will be doing just that, going with 65nm, and getting really close to the other systems. They'll want a low-voltage setup anyway so you don't drain whatever batteries it's running on. But I just don't see it within a reasonable window of Sony and MS.

As for advances in cooling...I don't know. Thermal conduction is pretty simple. You get a big slab of metal and strap it to the core with conductive paste to fill the air gaps. This in turn gets hot, so you slap a fan on that to cool it. Those heat pipes/heat exchange engines, still need some way of dissipating the heat. Heat doesn't vanish. It's just moved away from the chip. So in a small form factor, you're talking about moving lots of heat away from a chip, but it's still trapped in a small airspace. What's gonna cool that? You need even better airflow in a smaller space b/c it'll heat up faster. I don't think there's any miracle here unless the entire airspace will be air-conditioned. This could be done, but then you'll just move the heat somewhere on the outside of the case.

The other solution is to find a low-power, low clockspeed design that sacrifices performance in order to stay cool. You can get a lot of performance in a small form factor as evidenced by laptops. But like laptops, it won't match its bigger brethren. I'm really tired right now, so I hope that made sense. But to me it seems like I'm just rambling. PEACE.
 
My guess

EDIT: oops I ment GHZ not MHZ..)

3.2 GHZ single core CPU
500 MHZ, straight forward ATI GPU with a few tricks like the cube mapping
512 MB of ram
25 GB bus

They're saving money on the chips being traditional, the ram will be 512MB.
 
I know that once all the three systems are out it will still be a long time before the controversy of wether the Revolution is stronger or weaker than the other two is over. Overall it's all gonna look similar and just like the DS there's a chance they won't even release specs.
 
Look, they're developing new chips for a new console with some very skilled people at ATI and IBM. At the very least, this shows that, like every new Nintendo console, it will be a generation ahead of the previous system. The numbers they use to describe that technological leap (2-3 times more powerful) are about as useful to us right now as Sony and Microsoft's numbers. Why would they make entirely new hardware that only marginally improves upon GameCube?
 
"They're really pushing innovation in game play," said J Allard, who oversees the Xbox business for Microsoft. "But they didn't reveal enough about Revolution for me to have an opinion."
very diplomatic!

i.e. 'if we mess up with 360, next time we're going to try and side with nintendo' ;)
 
Look at the bright side, Revolution graphics are guaranteed to be at least as good as Gamecube's!!!!!!!!!
 
capslock said:
Look at the bright side, Revolution graphics are guaranteed to be at least as good as Gamecube's!!!!!!!!!


For a console which its major selling/revealing point thus far is that it plays nes/snes/n64/cube games...I find even this statement precarious :-P
 
Amir0x said:
It also came out a year after PS2. Like Xbox. And "blows out of the water" is not a phrase I'd use to describe any of the current gen systems in relation to each other. "Sufficiently outperforms" is better.
It came out a year later but the technology is actually closer in age to PS2 than Xbox. Nintendo sat on GC a year to drive down initial production costs and get some software ready, but the chipset was ready for mass production as far back as fall 2000. Really, it's a marvel of efficiency in a relatively tiny package... with GameCube as their track record I'm surprised so many are doubting Nintendo's ability to compete. They have some of the best engineers in the world on Revolution.
 
jarrod said:
It came out a year later but the technology is actually closer in age to PS2 than Xbox. Nintendo sat on GC a year to drive down initial production costs and get some software ready, but the chipset was ready for mass production as far back as fall 2000. Really, it's a marvel of efficiency in a relatively tiny package... with GameCube as their track record I'm surprised so many are doubting Nintendo's ability to compete. They have some of the best engineers in the world on Revolution.

That's true. Im pretty sure Nintendo could have released the GC almost simultaneously with PS2 if they wished, I believe the tech was there and finished. It was purposely delayed for other reasons. If they at least put as much effort into the new tech as they did with GC, then it should be fine. If they purposefully decide to make the console weaker than the competition, thats another issue.
 
Amir0x said:
I must say, this is one of the most wildly irrational posts I've read since joining GAF. Congrats.

Yet, I strangely agree with a lot of his points... Gaming was so much better when it was the nerds playing and people would laugh in your face if they found out you were into it. Nowadays, everybody and their mother is into it, and not even the good games anymore.
 
jarrod said:
They have some of the best engineers in the world on Revolution.
They have the minds at ArtX behind the GPU, so not about to sell the system short in the graphics department. Without ArtX, we'd all still have Nvidia cards in our PCs.
 
Duckhuntdog said:
They have the minds at ArtX behind the GPU, so not about to sell the system short in the graphics department. Without ArtX, we'd all still have Nvidia cards in our PCs.

Didn't ATI come out with the 9700 line with the help of ArtX? (After the acquisition?) Its the card that propelled them back to the game.
 
"It has the power of a Ferrari, and they are talking about Saturn rockets," said Mr. Iwata, referring to the three consoles. "But we are traveling on earth."

:lol good quote.

Still with the rev coming out after the 360 and specs still not available i cannot see Nintendo making it less powerful than it.
 
Duckhuntdog said:
Without ArtX, we'd all still have Nvidia cards in our PCs.
True that. I wonder if the core ArtX team is still together or they've been split up amongst the various departments.
 
Slurpy said:
Didn't ATI come out with the 9700 line with the help of ArtX? (After the acquisition?) Its the card that propelled them back to the game.


yep
whats more, that core is beeing recycled even today in the x800 line (since the artX team was prolly tied up with console gpu development after the 9700)
 
Here is one practical way the Nintendo Ferrari could outpace Microsoft's Saturn rocket despite lower raw specs.

Xbox 360 uses the outmoded DXT (Direct X Texture Compression) which is just a variant of S3TC found in GameCube/Xbox/PSP. Here are Tim Sweeney's comments on texture compression made more than a year ago:

"Texture compression is a huge area ripe for IHV innovation, and I've been quite surprised at the lack of significant innovation in that area. The existing DXT formats come very close to maxing out the quality/size trade-off possible with ultra-low-computation-overhead 4x4 block compression schemes. Further compression will rely on more sophisticated random-access schemes operating on larger blocks. If you look at the JPEG 2000 results, they have achieved perhaps 10X better quality/size than DXT1-5. Hardware JPEG 2000 is probably not practical, but one could certainly achieve far better results than DXT by moving towards a scheme somewhere in between in complexity.

"The benefits of implementing better compression would be substantial. Since most GPU memory is occupied by textures, a scheme that achieved 4X better compression would enable a future GPU with 256MB to perform equally to a GPU with 1024MB. I would wager that the added cost of the decompression hardware would be far lower than the cost of the larger memory configuration."

So if IRD, NTD and ATI have got their design right you could quite easily see a Revolution with half the addressable graphics memory of the X360 but offering twice the texture quality.
 
djtiesto said:
Yet, I strangely agree with a lot of his points... Gaming was so much better when it was the nerds playing and people would laugh in your face if they found out you were into it. Nowadays, everybody and their mother is into it, and not even the good games anymore.

I'm not sure if you're being serious, but if you are I'm sorry you feel that way. Frankly, I don't really give a fuck how many people are playing videogames. I welcome the whole world.
 
Top Bottom