Innovance

yeh i really hope nintendo use a PPu. I mean i was shocked that given all the money they spent on their consoles sony and microsoft didnt use one in their consoles, their machine would have been so much better had they done this (assuming the performance gains of a PPU are as good as advertised). But after seeing the freehand controller i gained new hope for a ppu cos i saw nintendo aren't afraid to use technology that could actually improve the game experience. And the freehand controller begs for better physics IMO.

Thats the point HD isnt a graphical improvement its a resolution improvement. The thing is you need to view the game at the appropriate resolution to see the graphical improvements. The graphical improvements are still present at SD level but they are harder to see due to viewing the game at the incorrect resolution. Think resizing videos in media players

I agree, but that is only if the developer takes the time to make the game look good on a SDTV as well as a HDTV. I just hope that, 'you need a HDTV to see the graphical improvement' doesnt become a common statement this gen. The problem then becomes to make it look good both on HDTV and SDTV is going to cost more money. Judging by NBA2k6 downsampling to SD isnt going to work very well. Its the same on PCs i was playing need for speed most wanted demo and decided to experiment with the resolution. The lower i went the worse it looked. But it wasnt cos the graphics were getting worse but because i wasnt at the right resolution, and my distance from the monitor remained the same. As i increased the resolution it improved, its easy to think the graphics were getting better but it was only the resolution that was changing. kinda like adjusting the size of a video in media player. If i put it to full screen and move back it looks better (the further away i go) because the distortion of the increased size is less noticable. But this in my opinion defeats the purpose of increasing the size, cos my motive in increasing the size was to make it easier to see (clearer) at my current distance. Now that i think about it the reviewers should have tried moving further / closer to the screen. To see how that affected the visual quality (cos the graphics werent changing). Eventually they would prolly have reached a distance where it looked good again, without the need for HDTV. This kinda messes up my previous arguments a lil, but also presents a semi-solution (not a good one mind) for SDTVs HDTVs sampling issues. the problem is its not really obvious (adjusting you distance) unless you think about it nor is it convenient. Anyway this really puts the focus of the HD issue on developer/consumer/possibly hardware (performance not power) costs for me.

Wow. I really dont get how you can call me a fanboy for supporting no HD. Outside of it makes thigns better what other gains are there to HD?? With HD you havent improved the graphics you only improved the resolution and made things clearer. Its a clear visual improvement but comes at a price. ive seen HD as i use a pc and play game on it. The main negative point that the starter of this thread is addressing, is if you view something at a different resolution than its intended for it looks worse. This means that unless developers put in more work (spend more money) people playing 360 for the most part are going to end up with worse looking games. The real issue with that is the majority of game players still only have SDTVs. Regardless of the uptake rate of HDTVs, MS have for the most part screwed over the SD portion of their userbase. Now the downside to nintendos decision is that for those who buy HDTVs rev games are likely going to look worse on those too. I guess nintendo should leave the choice up to developers, BUT the problem with that is that eventually again HD will become standard through peer pressure amongst developers. That is likely to occur at a higher rate than HD uptake again screwing the majority consumer. So my point is given those and other negatives i support nintendos decision because at this moment in time HD penetration is not high enough to assume that the majority of your userbase will have HDTVs. Implementing HD at this moment in time will also be a waste of money not in terms of hardware but in terms of software development and value for money for the AVERAGE consumer. That said nintendo could implement HD as there is a far more widespread HD device in peoples homes, PC monitors which they have already confirmed it will connect too, only problem with that is sound. So why dont nintendo do it that way? BTW i dont necessarily support sony's push for HD, But i understand it and i agree that THEY NEED it. Its not a consumer driven decision for sony, the fact that they are rumoured to lose $100 on every PS3 should tell you that its more than that. They are desperate for HD to take off, and it is not for the benefit of gamers. Ive presented my arguments, I dont think those are the typical fanboy type arguments you are implying (im not a fanboy by the way, i like games in general, just nintendo makes most of my favourite) now you need to give me a more solid argument as to why nintendo is wrong to not implement HD, and your current argument of 'HD makes things better' is an example of another fanboy type argument

To expand on your point, Its about more than HDTVs for sony. They more than likely have the next gen format in blu-ray. So they are going to get PAID if blu-ray reaches popularity. On top of that the move to HD gives them the oppertunity to resell all their IP on a new format. You have to remember sony is a content maker as well, Blu-ray gives them another chance to resell their popular films all over again. Microsofts motives are really unclear to me. If anyone knows why they are pushing HD so hard id like to hear it.

Why do people find it so difficult to understand nintendos position on these things. We would all mostly agree that moeny makes the world go round figurativly speaking. So why dont you see that the overriding factor in all those "mistakes" nintendo made was profit. Live was successful to a point. but the subscription part held it back, Because that was the only way microsoft could make it work, if Live had been free then you could tell me that nintendo were wrong to not implement online this gen. What i want to know is why half a gen later nintendo is able to offer a free service. That is the question people should be asking? The ever popular disc format argument. Cds were the future, nintendo were stubborn / stupid. Nintendo werent stubborn or stupid they just handled it incorrectly at the time or i guess as best as it could be handled. The main profit point here was piracy nintendo saw it coming and side stepped it. It hurt them but at least they were making profit. I didnt even know that videogame piracy was possible till sony launched the playstation. Then every PS1 owner i met had it chipped or those other things that let them play CD-Rs. I dont know how much money sony lost but im telling you it was significant, if it wasnt they wouldnt be as aggressive with the DRM for PSP or PS3. HD is just another profit issue, if they dont find a way to do it profitably then they wont do it. This is why nintendo make more profit than their competitiors cos they are smarter with their money.

I agree Leaving out the shell is too big a risk, especially when your telling developers 'you dont have to make your games work with the wand', which is what jim merrick said. Itll be like the DS multifunctional, you can use all or none of the extra functionality. Your only limited by your creativity. Not including the shell is a move i seriously doubt they will make. The real problem comes in handling the situation with the shell. If you announce that its going to be inlcuded it looks like you dont have faith in your new control method. Where as if you dont include it, developers wont have enough faith to make games for it so we get less games from the ones that dont want to use the shell. The you will also have problems with the virtual console. All those who think that nintendo has killed the classic controls with the wand are being too fanboy minded. Even nintendo dont believe they have done that. Id be willing to be that even if there was no virtual console there would still be a shell. Nintendo are trying to cater to everyone, without the shell there are far too many potential alienations, which is less profit. With the shell you got all bases covered and are in a position to potentially rake in a lot of money

his comments werent taken out of context. His favorite console was clearly a fan of the 360. Tho he didnt bash nintendo as such, its clear his position on the revolution at that moment in time. It wasnt powerful enough to be a factor next gen and nobody but nintendo would be able to make good games for the new controller. At the same time he made it clear nintendo hadnt shown epic the controller / revolution either, discrediting himself 2 sentences later. Anyway if you think we misinterpretted then go watch the video his then posiiton is pretty clear. What you have to wonder is why hed change his tone so much

i dont get how he can say a massively multiplayer game isnt nintendos style??? Animal crossing, if anything wouldnt a massively multiplayer type thing be the next step for this franchise? I wonder what kind of disc format itll use, i hope it isnt going to be DVD, it wont be HD-dvd or bluray either or the GC discs, so what is left??

hmm im not sure looking at this thread made me realize why nintendo are aiming for a worldwide launch. Not to compete with MS, but to avoid imports, in the past nintendo have had issues with importers (the shops) i dont remember why, but if you at least promise a worldwide launch you disrupt those potential import sales, as the higher price isnt worth getting it a couple weeks early (for some anyway). Does anyone know why videogame companies have issues with importers?? Cos recently sony were doing something similar with regards the PSP, even though it was partially their own failure to ship on time which resulted in the spike in imports

yeh his choice of words will no doubt add more fuel to the 'crazy revolution speculation' fire

ya know he said exactly what ive been saying, the videogame market isnt as helathy as analysts say it is. He basically confirmed what ive been thinking too, they have the safest strategy. Nintendo understands that people are now owning more than one console so they gone to extra legnths to position themself as the only second console worth having, and a worthwhile primary system. It just all remains to be seen if their plans come to fruition on paper its solid, and like he said sony's arrogance only makes their task easier, it will be a real shame if sony still has the largest marketshare coming out of the next gen. Simply because they dont care about games or gamers. Its interesting how all their ideas, and aims all managed to fit within a sound business plan, where as most people were saying they had their backs against the wall and were trying something desperate. The only thing i wish hed commented on was piracies effect on the industry.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=12670 nintendo may never reveal the specs of the revolution. But i guess it would just be formally announcing them cos after all the developers and have got kits and the thing is released eventully someone is going to reveal the specs. While its a good idea in theory as well as a refreshing change, in practice it just give the impressionof being weaker. not to me but you know how the general consensus will see it.

haha you know what would really give that 3d effect the edge?? A PPU. A dedicated PPU and nintendo will have truly made a next gen console IMO its what sony and microsofts consoles are truly missing which is a surprise considering how much they have invested in graphics. No talk of the price of the component as to why it wont happen cos frankly i dont buy that.

i want to know why analysts never look at the markets history? If they did they'd surely know that the best predicitions they could make were general ones. Further more there are too many unknowns. And the seem to think the market is booming yet there are so many companys going out of business. id love to right my own market analysis and predictions. But i know the closest i can predict is what each console has going for it and against it there are far too many variables to say this many million. lol oh yeh and brand is overated, ask nintendo and sega