Xenon > Revolution
- Thread starter Bishman
- Start date
- Status
soundwave05
Member
Yep, more or less expected.
Still, now the people who were trying to discredit Matt's sources about the PS3 whupping the XBox 360's ass will be jumping on his bandwagon.
Still, now the people who were trying to discredit Matt's sources about the PS3 whupping the XBox 360's ass will be jumping on his bandwagon.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
I smell bullshit. Not even Nintendo would do something as stupid as release a weaker system a year later than the competition.
Cold-Steel
Member
Bishman said:
Releasing a year later with only MINOR hardware improvement?
Give me a break Nintendo. Who are you competing with again?!?
Nice that you ignored the 1st statement and concentrated on the second stating some. But then again, who cares? Nintendo isn't hanging everything next gen on graphics. Pretty pathetic, if you wanna be a prick, that Nintendo isn't even interested in graphics and is still MS' equal in that area. Plus, if they have the sense to include the PPU, it'll probably put them ahead.
ImNotLikeThem
Member
there seems to be a lot of speculation on both matt and the developers parts. obviously they arent final specs, since they've just now started hearing "some" specs, and "some" developers say it "might" be less powerful? i don't think anyone should be jumping the gun on things at this point. we don't even have concrete released MS specs for everything yet do we?
soundwave05
Member
ImNotLikeThem said:
We the public don't have specs, but it doesn't mean that developers haven't been given the low down on what the system's are roughly power wise.
Matt's just relaying what he's hearing from the bigger dev houses.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
He say's could, so its a possibility it may be more on a even plane. Nintendo never go so far to try to out do anyone but atleast be comparable. Nintendo still has enough time to make adjustments to the console chipset to match Xenon technically. I think memory may be an issue, I don't see Nintendo matching them on that end.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
I don't really care about all this....I still say the system's line up by games and not power...but Nintendo has been saying all along that they don't want to concentrate on graphics. I doubt photo-realism is their goal. And they will probably have the cheapest system to produce again.
Why isn't the mention of Matt-IGN banned yet? Seriously, I think most of GAF is just annoyed with the shit that comes out of his mouth.
Revolution to launch a year later and it's only going to be on -par- with X360? Gamecube launched before Xbox did and it's pretty comparable in terms of power.
Crock of shit mailbag speculation.
Revolution to launch a year later and it's only going to be on -par- with X360? Gamecube launched before Xbox did and it's pretty comparable in terms of power.
Crock of shit mailbag speculation.
soundwave05
Member
Hero said:
It's not speculation, it's what he's hearing from developers.
It sounds like you guys are just more pissed off because what he's hearing isn't lining up with what you might have hoped for.
With Revolution, obviously I think Nintendo is banking on their new control interfaces to give them an edge. Think of the DS (not literally), but closer in terms of power to the PSP, and you may have an idea of how the Revolution will stack up.
You also have to understand, gyroscopic controllers/microphone/built-in camera etc. etc. etc. (whatever Nintendo may be planning) isn't free either. It still costs extra money, which takes a chunk out of the hardware budget.
Actually I see this as the only way it could of been. Imagine if MS's Xbox consoles went from the most powerful this generation to the least powerful next gen. The backlash would of been enormous. They both will be comparable in output but the PS3 will blow them both away in power. :lol
According to IGN.
According to IGN.
worldrunover
Member
Wait, this matters why?
Power:
PS1 < N64
Reality:
PS1 > N64
Power:
PS2 < Xbox
PS2 < GC
GC < Xbox
Reality:
PS2 > Xbox
PS2 > GC
GC > Xbox
I rest my case.
Power:
PS1 < N64
Reality:
PS1 > N64
Power:
PS2 < Xbox
PS2 < GC
GC < Xbox
Reality:
PS2 > Xbox
PS2 > GC
GC > Xbox
I rest my case.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
...and obviously, the power of TOUCHABLE BUM controllers has yet to be estimated. I hear when you tickle them they make a farting noise! Oh, crazy developers!
IT'S THE GAMES. The only people worrying about all this crap about which console will be more powerful is us!
I believe Nintendo needs to deliver the usual bunch of Nintendo-brand games (Mario, etc.) in addition to MUCH more new content. I think it's a particular target they've got to aim for. A Pikmin style game won't push the console. Something very cool and online-friendly. Online is the future, it's the new arcade. Nintendo has to attack this.
On their third console, who else can Sony attract? MS seems to be worrying about getting Sony's customers. Nintendo's got a good chance to suprise a lot of people, but it's all on them.
I believe Nintendo needs to deliver the usual bunch of Nintendo-brand games (Mario, etc.) in addition to MUCH more new content. I think it's a particular target they've got to aim for. A Pikmin style game won't push the console. Something very cool and online-friendly. Online is the future, it's the new arcade. Nintendo has to attack this.
On their third console, who else can Sony attract? MS seems to be worrying about getting Sony's customers. Nintendo's got a good chance to suprise a lot of people, but it's all on them.
soundwave05
Member
Well from Nintendo's POV they're probably looking at it like this: they launched a year after the PS2 with better hardware and it really didn't help them.
If IBM/ATi offered them a better chipset than the XBox 2 (slightly better) but it was more expensive than one which was slightly less powerful (although looks almost the same) ... you can guess which Nintendo would pick.
Also who really knows how much these "revolutionary" additions to the Revolution will add price wise.
The biggest cost component in the DS has to be that touchscreen LCD, otherwise the system could probably be $99 or close to PSP level in power at $150.
Innovation still has a price tag. My feeling is Nintendo is going to be a little bolder than just throwing in a regular controller with rubbing controller or some crap like that. I think its going to be something substantially different, and that probably means more expensive than a regular controller.
If IBM/ATi offered them a better chipset than the XBox 2 (slightly better) but it was more expensive than one which was slightly less powerful (although looks almost the same) ... you can guess which Nintendo would pick.
Also who really knows how much these "revolutionary" additions to the Revolution will add price wise.
The biggest cost component in the DS has to be that touchscreen LCD, otherwise the system could probably be $99 or close to PSP level in power at $150.
Innovation still has a price tag. My feeling is Nintendo is going to be a little bolder than just throwing in a regular controller with rubbing controller or some crap like that. I think its going to be something substantially different, and that probably means more expensive than a regular controller.
soundwave05 said:
I'm pissed off because anytime there's any topic about Revolution it turns out to be someone posting something from Matt-IGN and the mailbag.
Not to mention that most of this generation Matt has been one of the most detrimental vocal media writers against Nintendo. He says 'developers' but who is that supposed to indicate exactly? It doesn't make sense.
And Nintendo has already said that the next console will have power behind it and it won't be seen as a budget system like the Gamecube was.
Ghost of Bill Gates
Banned
Bishman said:
You mean VGA output?!
It'll come down to what they are willing to spend on the hardware. I don't know of too many times that Nintendo has sold hardware for loss other than initial months of Gamecube being $99.99
I know Microsoft isn't planning on losing much unit either but since they seemed to have ditched the HD that's more money to focus on the GPU and CPU costs. I still find it funny that two of the systems are going to have ATI/IBM chips. Makes me wonder why I want to give the same two companies money twice...
I know Microsoft isn't planning on losing much unit either but since they seemed to have ditched the HD that's more money to focus on the GPU and CPU costs. I still find it funny that two of the systems are going to have ATI/IBM chips. Makes me wonder why I want to give the same two companies money twice...
soundwave05
Member
Hero said:
Matt's comments fall in line with what Nintendo has said about the Revolution power wise (it'll be on par). They've never said anything about the system being more powerful though.
IGN got most of the scoops on the GCN hardware (from the mini-DVDs to several other aspects) before other websites.
Whether you like it or not, they probably do have the best developer contacts in the biz.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
I wonder how the word "could" became the word is.
heh Matt is probably just downplaying the power of teh Revolution.
I cannot say one way or another if Revolution will be less powerful, as powerful or more powerful than Xenon. but, I believe no matter what, the difference (either way) will be less than the difference between Gamecube and Xbox, since Gamecube and Xbox were made by totally different companies and design teams, and Gamecube is alot older than Xbox technologically even though they released at about the same time..
Gamecube2 and Xbox2, i mean Revolution and Xenon, are being built by the same companies (ATI, IBM) and should use some technology that is somewhat similar, although far from exact. they will be coming out within 9 months of each other. more space than there was between Gamecube and Xbox, but they probably will. have been finished less than a year apart.
It will all come down to developer talent, resources, artwork, time, money, effort, and sheer will. both machines will be capable of out putting very similar graphics. hundreds of millions of textured pixel shaded, lit, filtered (and hopefully AA) geometric shapes (polys) per second
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
I want to see fun addictive games. give me a new Herzog Zwei
I cannot say one way or another if Revolution will be less powerful, as powerful or more powerful than Xenon. but, I believe no matter what, the difference (either way) will be less than the difference between Gamecube and Xbox, since Gamecube and Xbox were made by totally different companies and design teams, and Gamecube is alot older than Xbox technologically even though they released at about the same time..
Gamecube2 and Xbox2, i mean Revolution and Xenon, are being built by the same companies (ATI, IBM) and should use some technology that is somewhat similar, although far from exact. they will be coming out within 9 months of each other. more space than there was between Gamecube and Xbox, but they probably will. have been finished less than a year apart.
It will all come down to developer talent, resources, artwork, time, money, effort, and sheer will. both machines will be capable of out putting very similar graphics. hundreds of millions of textured pixel shaded, lit, filtered (and hopefully AA) geometric shapes (polys) per second
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
I want to see fun addictive games. give me a new Herzog Zwei
soundwave05
Member
My guess is Revolution will be weaker in some areas, but stronger is other areas than Xenon and most importantly for Nintendo, probably a little cheaper/more cost efficent to manufacture.
OG_Original Gamer said:
Eh, good point. Seems to be theoretical at this point as they have no Dev Kits available to compare it.
But even if it is slightly less powerful than 360 that is not going to hurt Nintendo as much as picking a proper storage medium ala DVD-9 or HD-DVD. If Nintendo can't see that then they need to just hang it up right now. People won't buy another media-less Nintendo console.
Zelda-Bitch
Member
Still to early to know guys. If the Revolution comes out a year later though I'm willing to bet the bank it will be more powerful then the Xbox 360(or whatever it's called these days).
p.s.- I find it funny how everyone makes fun of matt with his *wild speculations* until it's something not pro nintendo. :lol
p.s.- I find it funny how everyone makes fun of matt with his *wild speculations* until it's something not pro nintendo. :lol
Hero said:
He is #1 for Nintendo information. This is the guy who told us about Advance Wars GC before anyone. This is the guy who told us about Zelda before anyone. This is the guy who will eventually tell us about Silicon Knights. Matt's history is credible and you should respect him.
citrus lump
Banned
is it me or do people need help on < and >?
OG_Original Gamer
Member
Its all in theory and speculation.
Matt's just reporting on the hearsay he's received. That doesn't mean the developers actually have a flippin' clue about the system's final specs.
I'm sure Revolution will be better in the areas where stuff gets cheaper. Faster processor, better chipset, blah blah.
But will Revolution have all the bells and whistles and graphical frills? Probably not.
The whole argument seems moot. Xenon and Revolution will both be very similar in horsepower but different in architecture, regardless. That year difference will probably just serve to tweak the Revolution a bit down the path it's already going, which might not be as easy to compare with Xenon as poly counts and Ghz.
I'm sure Revolution will be better in the areas where stuff gets cheaper. Faster processor, better chipset, blah blah.
But will Revolution have all the bells and whistles and graphical frills? Probably not.
The whole argument seems moot. Xenon and Revolution will both be very similar in horsepower but different in architecture, regardless. That year difference will probably just serve to tweak the Revolution a bit down the path it's already going, which might not be as easy to compare with Xenon as poly counts and Ghz.
- Status