JetSetWilly

The specs do matter in that they affect the perception of the machine in the hardcore-gamer market. These are the people who Nintendo need to adpot the machine first, they are the people who will be aware of it's existence at launch. GameCube is [wrongly] bashed for its kiddy image. Revolution will be bashed for having a kiddy image and being a wimp. Now if you look at DS vs PSP, well in Japan the DS didn't go supersonic until the games came that expanded the market. When DS and PSP were head-to-head with core-gamers the PSP weekly sales soon outstripped the DS. And, as Iwata has indirectly said in recent post-GDC interviews, the DS did not manufacture its own interest amongst non-gamers, it tapped into two things that are already very popular in Japanese society - dogs and the Prof. Kawashima brain training books. Then take DS vs PSP in North America and Europe. Two territories which, I would argue, place a good deal more empahsis on image and perception. There the DS is not a clear winner. Amongst my peers they only know about DS cos I bang on about it, they're not interested - they want PSPs cos they have the image, power and content they're familiar with. If Revolution will be as powerful as the original Xbox or thereabouts how can it hope to compete with PS3 and Xbox 360 on visuals at launch let alone 5 years hence? You're not telling me that their greater power is just for HD alone else it would follow that you could make a game that looks like Ghost Recon or Oblivion for the current Xbox and you quite plainly can't. I'm all for innovation, but not at the expense of technology. In a world where first impressions based on visuals so often seal the deal Revolution will fighting with one arm behind its back.

I was at great pains to point out I wasn't slagging anybody off. Questioning the veracity of BigTac's posts is as legitimate as discussing the content. Doing both, I think, makes for an interesting and enjoyable thread - I don't see what there is to get worked up about.

Whenever I read how people defend BigTac's posts this quote always springs to mind: "When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown in to the sea". Now, I'm not trying to be critical of people here but do you not see how easy it is for BigTac, when there are so many who are eager to believe, to throw out the odd sardine to the seagulls and leave it at that? Nothing is ever said that you couldn't arrive at yourself if you spend a lot of time reading about the industry. I find it all a bit like a medium filling the Albert Hall with people, gazing into her crystal ball and saying: "Is there anyone here called John who's grandma passed away recently?" But as Pestneb said, it's all good fun reading it but don't take it too seriously - it's all vague enough so that whatever happens he's right. Props to Mr Cantona for the quote.

I can't decide whether it is saddening, ironic, both or neither that people will want to play "Nintendo" games on another platform rather than buy a Nintendo platform.

I wouldn't worry about stuff like this. If the Virtual Console is a success the content will be there. It would be like EA and Microsoft turning down (almost) free money. We already know Microsoft has no objection to letting Rare make money from Nintendo handhelds.

Someone asked for a link? http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=15659 Anyway, he was very careful with his words. He did not say they wouldn't do a global. He said they wouldn't do it just because the others did. All he's trying to do is show that Nintendo are they masters of their own destiny. If they launch globally it's because they choose to and not because the others have. It's a testament really to how Microsoft have shaken things up. Microsoft have fore-shortened the current generation life-span, they've broken the "rules" on a staggered launch. They're calling the tune in the next generation. Sony's hasty announcements last week were their thinly disguised attempt at catch-up. FWIW, it think anything other than a global launch is a mistake. It would make them look old-fashioned. They'd get away with it in Japan but nowhere else.

That'll be the "Crufts Effect".

Fail? How? Cos I didn't like it? I found I could never quite see what I wanted and never quite get hold of the Pikmin I wanted - all things that, if you care to read the review, are noted by IGN. Some people are OK with this but I'm dead fussy, I like intuitive controls - I don't like to have to fight the game in order to play it. As a result I never got on the Pikmin bandwagon, that's all.

I went for Pikmin 2 because the received wisdom seems to be that it's the better of the two. Couldn't get into it. The camera/controls were just awful, it's a constant battle to just see what you want to see. In the end I put it down, unlocked the handcannon in Resident Evil 4 and played through that again - much more fun

Further proof, if any were needed, that releasing Zelda on the Cube would be pure folly.

But it isn't a leap forward. It's a further consolidation of what the current generation offers. For some the improvements you describe are enough. For others it isn't. Mario Sunshine wasn't a better game than Mario 64 even though it had better graphics. I think the money M$ want for what are only incremental improvements is way too much. Ultimately content will drive sales rather than gloss. And at the moment Xbox 360 is widely perceived as lacking in that department. The best reviews I've seen for Xbox 360 were for simple games downloaded from Xbox Arcade Live which don't need even a fraction of the horsepower the system has. For me that says it all really.

Ultrajamie - that was an excellent post. If I may share my two penneth... It seems to me that the generations of consoles we've had so far have gone like this: NES/Master System era - re-establishes 2D console gaming. SNES/Megadrive era - consolidates 2D gaming experience, better graphics, pushes limits of 2D gaming. PS1/N64 era - the great leap forward into 3D gaming, a new experience, new ways to play. Cube/PS2/Xbox era - consolidates 3D gaming, better visuals again, pushes 3D gaming as far as it can go. So here were on the cusp, or slightly over it, of the next generation. History, in my opinion, says that the technology of this new generation should be a great leap forward. But here we are with Xbox 360 and what do we have? Barely half a step forward. The same is likely to be true of PS3. Sure there'll be plenty of gamers who'll lap it up, Halo will sell buckets and so will GTA but I predict that as this cycle progresses it will stagnate and gamers will get bored. There will be a Hollywood style slump. The Revolution, if Nintendo get it right, is a fantastic opportunity to offer that great leap forward. Getting it right is no easy task, but we should be thankful that Nintendo are at least trying.

Thanks for all the replies, everything people have mentioned sounds like stuff that would interest me so I think I'm sold. Just need to find someone unloading one cheap now! If only all this good stuff were on the Cube. *sigh*

What I read about ICO and Shadow of the Colossus makes me think someone who likes Zelda could enjoy those games. I mentioned Silent Hill cos I like survival horror and wondered if it was a natural counterpart to the RE series.

Are games like this: ICO Shadow of the Colossus Silent Hill Devil May Cry Good reasons to pick up a cheap PS2? I loved RE4 and wonder if those games are in a similiar-ish genre and I'm missing out here. After all, there's nothing on the Cube until Zelda.

The GameCube is the ultimate portable console - it has a handle. Reggie himself has said that they _used_ to think console portability was a big deal but that they don't anymore. Honestly, what makes people think that the new paradigm is a world full of gamers with 20 feet of blank wall space in their house, playing games with the curtains drawn, blinds down and lights off?

And the head of Nintendo UK denied there were any plans to redesign the DS exactly 1 day before the redesigned DS was announced. If Nintendo don't move Zelda over to Revolution as a launch title they are missing out on a cast-iron guarantee that Revolution will fly off the shelves. It's the only decision that makes any business sense. In fact, it's the only decision that makes any sense at all.

If Iwata gets on stage at E3 and starts showing his holiday slides using a Revolution - then I'll believe it. Until then, it's hogwash.

To make it more stable when stood vertically. Remember this is a small, light console that would be easily toppled if it sat flat in a stand. Compare that to the Sony "George Foreman Grill" or M$ XBox 360WhichIsReallyAPCInAFunnyBox and you have your answer.

Nintendo want you to forget about how games look and concentrate on how games play. In contrast, M$ and Sony want you to forget how games play (same as they always have) and concentrate on how they look.

This is nonsense. Where do the motion sensors go if the unit is projecting onto a screen? And given that you wouldn't be able to stand in front of the unit whilst it was projecting you'd be off at some stupid angle on the right/left. And what would be the point anyway? Who doesn't have a regular TV?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/default.stm Praise be. Today is a great day.

Zelda will fit comfortably on one disc. One Revolution disc that is. Wait and see...

At least it was a "game" and you didn't have to press about 5 different buttons at once to achieve a simple in-game action. But hey, you didn't like JSW and I didn't like Killer 7 and that's the beauty of sharing our opinions on this forum.

My point is that Amazon's dates are always positioned around logical times. April was the earliest release according to information from Nintendo. Now we've had Nintendo firm-up the Revolution release in time for Thanksgiving and suddenly the Zelda date moves again. Zelda's date on Amazon is clearly shadowing Revolution and it is in this respect when I say I doubt Amazon will be spectacularly wrong.