pulipinty Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Hello. I work for a UK based developer. I have some news for you guys, probably very good news. According to my sources, an agreement was made between IBM and Nintendo. IBM wants to join the console business, formerly they wanted to do that with Apple, but Apple agreed with Intel, so they have chosen Nintendo instead. They have all the money they need (the funny thing is, they have a shitload of money because MS have ordered lots of very expensive PPC processors from IBM to be used in XBOX360), and the state-of-the-art technology (which is Cell, of course). The previous rumors on this board about Nintendo inventing something, a way to developed amazing visuals with much lower specs and costs compared to the PS3 is somewhat true. In fact they did not "invent" anything, they will use ray-tracing for graphics, that's it. The hardware of Revo (the name of the console is in fact 'Nintendo Blue') will be far superior to that of the PS3. The PS3 and XBOX360 are more than obsolete compared to the new Nintendo.
knightendo Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 then why has iwata-san not even mentioned that it'll be more powerful, he wouldn't be giving away any secrets by just saying that! but all he's said is it'll be somewhat "similar"... this better not be a joke... i'll be heartbroken...
demonmike04 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 What on earth...Nintendo have already stated it will be less powerful! If it made PS3 obsolete, there is no chance in hell it could be cheaper than both of the other consoles.
knightendo Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 What on earth...Nintendo have already stated it will be less powerful! If it made PS3 obsolete, there is no chance in hell it could be cheaper than both of the other consoles. when did they say it'll be less powerful?? that's suicide!
demonmike04 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 when did they say it'll be less powerful?? that's suicide! Suicide? They've done it before. Its not all about power. Atleast back your claims up, but then again, i forgot to back mine up too.. It was in an IGN interview with a member of NOA a few days after revo's E3 revealing, they stated they will make a less powerful system so it will be quiet, energy efficient and not as expensive. Now, may you back your claim that it will be suicide for Nintendo to do that? If not, im guessing your one of those morons which realy on power and graphics, forgetting theres a revolutionary controller. Nintendo's goal is to attract new and ex video game players, not to make a powerful system.
Pestneb Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 The hardware of Revo (the name of the console is in fact 'Nintendo Blue') Nintendo Blue? Blue? 1) I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo had yet to decide 100% on the final name. 2) "Nintendo are releasing the Blue in Red, green, silver, white and black" yes that works. a black blue, or a white blue. perhaps in the future they will release a blue blue? 3)I'm a relative of Iwata's, and I don't think the revolutions final name will be "blue"
Konfucius Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 No offence but I'm a little suspicious about your credibility since there are so many "Ex-Nintendo employees" that reveal things about the Revo in their blogs. I read and saw some ingame footage in Gamestar about a German student who modified Quake 3 to support Raytracing and he needed 20 PC with about 3 GHz Intel or AMD (not sure) processors to run it with a decent framerate, so I doubt the Revo is capable of this (however the architecture of the PC processors wasn't optimized for Raytracing)
demonmike04 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 No offence but I'm a little suspicious about your credibility since there are so many "Ex-Nintendo employees" that reveal things about the Revo in their blogs. I read and saw some ingame footage in Gamestar about a German student who modified Quake 3 to support Raytracing and he needed 20 PC with about 3 GHz Intel or AMD (not sure) processors to run it with a decent framerate, so I doubt the Revo is capable of this (however the architecture of the PC processors wasn't optimized for Raytracing) Well this guy has said it all, none of these so called 'ex-employees' have been true (well actualy one was, with the Nintendo Nitro spec sheet), plus if they were all true, Nintendo must get alot of crap employee's EDIT: The guy mentioned he was a UK based developer, so that kinda messes up my post. Either way, i doubt any of this is true. Like i said, only one rumour about nintendo consoles was true, and that was the Nitro (DS) spec sheet.
Demuwan Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 What a liar. Most of the things you just said was just wishfull thinking on your part. Please do not waste our time.
Cheapshot Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Not that I believe it or anything but it's possible right? 8 Cell chips; what am I talking about?! Balony!! >_< 25GB "holographic" memory?! T_T
triforce_keeper Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 yeh.......what ever lol I would like it but Im not really bothered about the graphics as long as its speedy im fine with it!!!
Sooj Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Nintendo Blue? hmmm Blue Light? Could "Nintendo Blue" not just be the initial codename or something? I find you post pulipinty somewhat plausible yet I can't believe it 100% but still, nice read; pretty interesting.
Cheapshot Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 This is ridiculous!! 8 Cells?! 25GB memory?! All this junk and the console would cost around £3000+ Nintendo Blue? T_T
zoramon089 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 You guys heard wrong. He never said the Revolution wasn't less powerful, he just said on paper it would look less powerful. What i mean is that the specs might be lower but the system will still be powerful. Like how the GC specs are lower than the Xbox's yet many ppl say the graphics are almost the same
system_error Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 LOL. That is so funny ... is there no rule that people without sufficient technical background are not allowed to make post a la "I work as an developer for in <insert country> and I know that <insert company> works on <insert totally stupid technical blabla> for <insert another company>" Raytracer, Holographic, 25GB, ... go to college - finish it and then you can make up believable fake news. Ah before I forget IBM wants to enter the console business and develops <same insane technology you entered before> for Nintendo? Do you know that IBM makes some good money with CPUs for Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony? Why for gods sake should they just go with Nintendon alone?
Wesley Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Alright then. I'll take your word for it, complete-stranger-on-an-internet-forum.
Tyson Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Nintendo Blue? hmmm Blue Light? Could "Nintendo Blue" not just be the initial codename or something? You mean N5? I believe that was the first codename.
gorrit Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Wow, there is much bull*beep* in the first post that it would make 99% of all the other fakers blush.
demonmike04 Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Lmao, maybe Nintny said revolution will be cheaper than both of the best PS3 and 360 sets put together? Coz that'l certainly be true if this is real. Gd luck with your bull s*** elsewere, coz no one here has bought it.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 If this is true. I will explode. Seriously.
Meo Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Ehhh...hummm... I really don't know what to think about this. Despite beeing a interesting, VERY interesting idea, I don't really think that Nintendo has adopted such a form of rendering. For those who want to see what ray-tracing is capable of, check out this image: And for those who want to know more about this, go HERE This is a very heavy process for even top-notch CPU's, and although I believe that in time processors will be able to run smoothly this applications, I find it a VERY remote chance that a console utilises such based operations. Just my 2 cents, though
gorrit Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Yeah, sure, raytracing looks great, but there are like zero GPUs that can handle it etc, making it dead slow. I don't think we will use raytracing in realtime anytime soon, or even ever, we will probably use "hacks" that'll look just as nice but be much faster.
Meo Posted September 28, 2005 Posted September 28, 2005 Yeah, sure, raytracing looks great, but there are like zero GPUs that can handle it etc, making it dead slow. I don't think we will use raytracing in realtime anytime soon, or even ever, we will probably use "hacks" that'll look just as nice but be much faster. Yes, you do have a point. Probably they will discover another trick to render similar graphics, but still this is the most accurate technique to render more realistic graphics,and the most simple, as far as my knowledge goes, since it is a very straight forward technique. I don't think GPU's are the main problem here, since ray-tracing depends heavily on CPU-based calculations and ram to calculate and render those accurate shadows and lightning effects.
Recommended Posts