Rumour: Nintendo should worry...

[Dilli Gee]

A bit of motion sensitivity tacked on?

But then, you could argue that most 360 titles are just graphical upgrades.

That's wrong. Most the ports are designed for Xbox 360 first, then ported down. But most 360 games are new, just like PS3's.

[pedrocasilva]

Maybe he realises that the Wii line up is mainly ports and games that were perfectly achievable last gen, with a bit of motion sensitivity tacked on?

It's not as simple as 2 camps, people who love the Wii and people who are obsessed with graphics. It never will be.

Achieved last gen? with a controller add-on? the console is just good as is.

 

I'm obsessed with graphics too, but I know how to judge them by the machine they're on.

 

And Wii is no "gamecube", we've seen graphics far from those done by GC, running at 60 fps.

For the first question, I would love to just care for the games, but if the system fails, so does retail support and so does the ability to release games. The reason why there is a lack of support for GC is because it wasn't popular, and was boycotted by retailers. Third parties then decided it wouldn't be profitable releasing games for it, and so it died.

it still gave profit where Xbox lost 6 bilion dolars... even Sony crapped his pants when she saw that.

 

Nintendo couldn't afford that to buy "support", not saying everything Nintendo done was right, because it wasn't, but Wind Waker for example marked the beggining of the end for cube, in the E3 it was shown IGN revealed the GC channel was left empty, with most of the ip's that were on it going for Xbox channel, users complained and said it was kiddy, etc, etc...

 

So what? the game rules, Nintendo did what it thought it should artistic-wise.

 

With the second part, here are my issues:

 

1) The price is at least £30 too high. The system isn't worth enough to merit an upper-range price. It should have been €229/£150.

Still cheaper than it's competitor, with a game included.

 

2) No DVD player. Fine, I understand it doesn't NEED one, but if it really wants to be this lounge centre-piece Nintendo seems to have dubbed it, it needs one. And one of the reasons why GameCube failed is because it lacked a DVD player, surely they'd learn from previous mistakes, right?

discussed today in this thead be sure to read my coments, would you still buy it for the price demanded by Nintendo? Is it necessary in 2006?

3) The system is only a little bit better than the GameCube, graphically. I know it's a shallow complaint, but it's still valid. For the price it costs to buy it, it should be closer to Xbox 360 than the original Xbox. But then Nintendo doesn't like to lose money first (albeit Microsoft will break even this year sometime).

Won't even comment on that, you've never even seen the gamecube being pushed to it's limits. Trust me... that's no slouch.

 

NP: I'm not sure if it's possible but in what ways has Rogue Squadron 3 been visually improved?

 

BT: (...) A brand new engine was developed in order to support the multiplayer. The bonus side effect of that is we are now able to push twice the number of polygons in the single player mode, thus greatly improving the model detail.

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20040218064441/www.n-philes.com/php/epypuyazfuevkavvvyep.php

 

Rogue Squadron 2 ran at 60 fps with all effects applied with 15 million poligons on-screen... this interview talks about doubling that to 30 million poligons for RS3, still with all effects applied and running at 60 fps.

 

For the record... Xbox pushed 15 million polygons with some effects applied at 30 fps... that's right, gamecube outputted 4 times those polygons, and with all effects applied.

 

Also:

Revolution, as it stands now as a BARE MINIMUM based on clockspeed alone, is capable of 60 million polygons per second in an actual game in 480p. I don't think I've seen these kind of specs in first-generation Xbox 360 games in 720p, but I could be wrong.

Gears of War I think, being based on so many shaders alone, will be low-polygon as well (though looking amazing to the EYE).

 

You'll be suprised how much power you have left to take advantage of when you aren't using close to 100MB for a frame buffer.

 

This is Revolution, which uses the EXACT same architecture, memory, and fillrate requirements as GameCube.

 

GameCube was fine. Add twice the amount of memory, triple the fillrate and polygon performance, and you get astronomical figures and performance. And this is considering NOTHING is added to the chips in terms of features.

 

More than likely there will be SEVERAL additions, making the thruput even higher at the same peaked resolution of 640 X 480.

(...)

Revolution's clock speeds are barely 33% faster than GameCube's CPU and GPU. However, this yields thruput to nearly 3 times that of GameCube's achieved specs, and anywhere from 3-10 times more than the "conservative" specs originally given by Nintendo (polygon thruput).

 

So it depends on what you mean by "power". Sony used total FLOP performance (which is useless unless all SPE's are used for Floating point calculations), and Microsoft used CPU clockspeed (which means nothing going from Intel to PowerPC, as PPC chips are faster than Intel chips at the same clockspeed anyway).

(...)

Anyhow, from the looks to things now based on the WORST Revolution can do based on just clockspeed, the system can compete in polygon pushing with 60 million polys/sec in-game at 640 X 480. 360 doesn't appear to be doing this right now to my knowledge, and even if it's CLOSE, the eventual vertex/pixel pipe increases in final Revolution specs will only make that 60 million higher.

 

I'm willing to guess that, all other things being the same, Hollywood LSI is capable of around 140 million polygons/second in 640 X 480 with vertex pipelines added.

(...)

Nintendo's system isn't going to be as powerful as the other systems- that's granted. HOW MUCH, though, has NEVER been determined by Nintendo, or anyone else. The closest thing we CAN use is numbers. Two of the most important being the fillrate of Revolution, and the native resolution it supports.

 

-GCN had perfect fillrate for 640 X 480. Revolution has that fillrate by threefold. Revolution is using the same resolution as GCN.

-Xbox 360 is NOT using the same resolution as most Xbox titles (480p). Xbox 360's fillrate and memory requirements are therefore MUCH higher.

-Insert the same above for PS3.

 

For example, Xbox 360 needs roughly TEN TIMES the amount of fillrate to achieve the same 20 million polygon per/second game in 1080i as Revolution would in 480i.

(...)

"limited RAM"? Are you serious? Do you know GameCube's memory is STILL the fastest on the planet in sustained latency? It's the closest thing to PURE SRAM, minus the huge price. 512MB of DDR CAN NOT infinitely recache textures over and over again without being refreshed, reconfirmed, and streamed TWICE by the CPU and GPU.

 

GameCube's GPU, Flipper, has more internal bandwidth than even most modern GPU's today (25GB/sec total). IF ANY updates are made in Hollywood, expect this speed to be faster.

Source: http://forums.g4tv.com/messageview.cfm?catid=8&threadid=575616&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=arc&STARTPAGE=1

 

I told you I was a graphics whore, the guy who wrote all that is one of the most knowledgable person in the world willing to talk about GC's architecture, he really knows his stuff.

 

Wii is a great console techwise, and so is gamecube (the most balanced system I've seen in years). underpowered my ass.

4) Lack of non-Wiimote functionality. I am nearly 100% certain the Wii audience will crave for traditional controls from time to time, and Nintendo has yet to assure us they have it covered, come that time.

Super Smash brothers is admitedly better played off with the standard controller, it's a first party title. Third party developers can do the same.

 

With DS it was the same, sure there's some gimmick utilization of the touch screen, but not all and certainly not most.

5) No hard-disk. It's pretty much standard, I think, in today's gaming age. Whilst it does have come compacity, only enough for game saves and one or two downloads. External drives are a no-no, so it's SD cards only. And they cost a lot.

What does it do to turn the games better? Microsoft doesn't advise developers to use it for games RAM caching, because it's slow as hell, a bottleneck in itself.

 

6) Not much of a killer launch line-up. GameCube's kicked global ass, this one's not. Zelda is pretty much the only killer app, possibly Red Steel for second.

GC didn't come out with 30 titles at once, last but not least, it's better to leave Zelda do all the work for christmas than releasing a rushed Mario Galaxy and Metroid.

 

I know I sound like a whiner, but I'm just worried, because I don't want Nintendo to fail. GC looked extremely promising in 2002, but it flopped. Just like the N64. Third time lucky? I hope so.

I understand that, but IMO it really doesn't matter... N64 didn't read music CD's, the cartidges costed as much as £20 alone (to the developers), but still Nintendo knew what she was doing, it could load a insane amount of data at once, thus, no loading times, all those corridors in N64 are fetching loadings, it's seamless and it would be completly impossible in any 1996 CD console.

 

N64 pushed a maximum of 5.000 polygons per frame for character and surroundings... for the record Leon in RE4 pushes 10.000 and the average for this generation is 5.000 to 7.500 polygons per character. (with Snake on Ps2 having 5.000), see where I'm getting at?

 

Nintendo still made a good profit with N64 and GC, being what it does best, games.

 

It woudl be good for Wii to manage to keep it's third party support and all, but it's really not a point of real concern for me, I'm getting a Wii no matter how it turns out.

[Gaijin von Snikbah]

[Phube]

Microsoft will have shipped 10 million units by the end of the year, so I don't think they're worried. The Xbox team are probably more worried about Zune, and are prepping that up.

 

.

 

But this means a loss of $1billion in it's first year!! Good going M$!!!

 

(This is going on the semi-reliable figure that M$ lose $100 on every premium 360 sold!!!)

[Hero-of-Time]

 

Also... as long as I'd like Wii to be sucessful, I couldnt care less, Gamecube was not that sucessful and I loved it, the games I wanted the most came out there, same for Wii.

 

Well done Pedro QFT!

 

Thats exactly what I was thinking yesterday when everyone was saying NiNtENDO is TEH DOOM3D when they annouced the price!!!!

 

I loved the Cube to bits and still do and even though it wasnt considered a success I class it as one of the best consoles I have had. Aslong as I get the enjoyment out of the Wii like I did with the Cube then I will be happy.

[Dilli Gee]

But this means a loss of $1billion in it's first year!! Good going M$!!! (This is going on the semi-reliable figure that M$ lose $100 on every premium 360 sold!!!)

You are correct. But Microsoft will break even for BOTH Xbox and Xbox 360 later this year, from sales of the latter system and games. Xbox 360 has been a hit for them.

[Teppo Holmqvist]

You are correct. But Microsoft will break even for BOTH Xbox and Xbox 360 later this year, from sales of the latter system and games. Xbox 360 has been a hit for them.

 

Break even for this year. There is no way that selling 4 million consoles wordwide with loss could cover over 6 billion dollar loses that Xbox made during four years. Or even cover Xbox 360's unknown development costs that probably fly around 500 million dollars.

[Dilli Gee]

Break even for this year. There is no way that selling 4 million consoles wordwide with loss could cover over 6 billion dollar loses that Xbox made during four years. Or even cover Xbox 360's unknown development costs that probably fly around 500 million dollars.

Xbox 360 loses $126 per system sale. However Microsoft increased their profits in software sales, so they make $30 from each game sold.

[dabookerman]

I would just like to make a point.

The DS is popular mainly because Nintendo own the handheld market. Handhelds do not require great graphics, simply because its a handheld. So from a design perspective all you need to do is worry about how the game will play, will it be fun in short or long bursts, is it immersive. And imo, its the official home of 2D entertainment, as of now.

 

The Wii, now i know Nintendo are trying to appeal to a mass market audience, and are also trying to bring new ways of playing, fair enough.

 

This seems to be their only focus.

 

Xbox 360 isnt about the innovations. They got what they were good at, graphics, power, online, and all they needed to focus on was to improve it. And games are starting to prove themselves, Capcom have been doing wonders for the 360 from what i can see.

 

Now the wii is a home console. I want immersive games like, Zelda, but at the moment there seem to be more focus on the quick quirky games that you would expect to see on the DS. Also, they have sort of made their point on their online system with weather news etc etc, but what happened to the online multiplay? Its been almost a year, and we are still settling for sub standard online play. This is one of the reasons im getting a 360, is for Xbox live (and castlevania and ninja gaiden and halo 3)

 

Im not worried about where Nintendo are heading, im certain they will be succesful, i even think they might come out on top this time, but i would love it if they kept their focus on more then just one thing.

 

I honestly dont understand this fanboyism, but what can i say, im getting all 3. you wont get any whining for me. Im a gamer at heart, and i just want to play the best games.

[AshMat]

The Wii is perfectly well priced, some people are forgetting that Nintendo have to make money on their consoles, not just please people

[Hal_9Million]

It may be cheaper, but M$ will just be losing more money.

[Dilli Gee]

The Wii is perfectly well priced, some people are forgetting that Nintendo have to make money on their consoles, not just please people

Nintendo are being greedy bastards. They make a profit on the system itself, as well as 50% of any software's profit (at least that was the case for GameCube).

 

With Microsoft, they lose $127 per system, but get 50% from software profits.

 

It may be cheaper, but M$ will just be losing more money.

Yeah that might be so. But as has been said, they make back the $127 they lose from game sales.

 

Buying 5 Xbox 360 games pays them back, and any further games makes them a profit.

[KKOB]

Nintendo are being greedy bastards. They make a profit on the system itself, as well as 50% of any software's profit (at least that was the case for GameCube).

 

With Microsoft, they lose $127 per system, but get 50% from software profits.

 

Nintendo HAVE to profit from almost everything they do-they only make games unlike sony and M$ who have other large sources of money.

 

in order to have the best developer in the world bring out the most imaginitive high quality hardware in the world i really dont mind paying a decent price to have my quality console with high quality games.

 

the controllers are expensive as theyre very complicated lil buggers and alot of money has gone into R&D of them so its important to get that money back into Nintendo.

 

the console is priced at the correct price-yes we have to pay more than america and everywhere else but we always do-least the mark up isnt like the 100 $ direct conversion difference it'll be for PS3 or what it was and is for 360.

 

if you want the console you will get it at launch, if you want to wait a while for more colours/games/wait for a year or so for a 30 quid price drop go ahead, but from the 8th of december i will be enjoying my purchase and not even thinking about the 500 quid i just dropped to get it with the games i want and an extra controller or two-and i'm a student.

[Noku]

First off, I have to say this... Pedro, my dear man, if I were queer and didn't already have a girlfriend, I'd mary you and (try to) have your babies. You rule.

 

Dilli_Gee, Microsoft's gaming devision won't turn a profit until fiscal year 2008, ie, March. http://www.gamespot.com/news/6154809.html

 

 

 

I love Nintendo. To the extent that I wholeheartedly regret the fact that babies and toddlers can't use a gamepad - for if they could, I'd have been there from the NES and onwards.

Nintendo will launch worldwide within less than one month's time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's a first (to my knowledge, at the least). If this shows anything, it's the Big N's craving for their reunion with the throne of the gaming industry.

 

Personally, I share Pedro's attitude towards graphics. The first footage of the Revolution was indeed a bit underwhelming, and, yes, I had my thoughts about the functionality and sensibility of the controls. But hey, time passed, conventions came and went, and I was reassured. Wii will rule.

 

If purely for external aesthetic reasons, I'd advise against the coffee-machine that is the 360, and more so against the '90s laptop without a screen that is the PS3. Internally, I really don't want my graphics to look that good that soon on. It'll only conceive more Jack Thompsons.

[Ren of Heavens]

I guess there will be a price cut right before Wii launches. Probably £169 for Core and £239 for Premium. At least there will be a price cut before before March when PS3 launches.

[xernobyl]

The only games that excite me at launch are Zelda and Red Steel. Whilst Nintendo as a company has three top profile games (Mario, Zelda and Metroid), so does Microsoft (Gears of War and Halo). And there have been some incredible 360 games in the past year, like Dead Rising.

 

I think Microsoft has the better games, at least out of the games we know in production for Wii.

 

Nintendo: 1 action/platformer game, 1 RPG, 1 FPS

Microsoft: 2 FPS

 

I'm tired of FPS. xbox360 will have some other great games (lost planet, fable 2, silent hill...) so does wii.

 

I really think Microsoft is kicking ass, they've really done their homework. If sony wins with PS3 or they have some really great stuff (that I doubt... exept MGS4), or people are just complety stupid. Nintendo must really promote Wii as being completely different.

[Dilli Gee]

Gears of War isn't a FPS. It's like Zelda, an action/platformer game but with guns instead of a sword.

 

Here are Xbox 360's flagship titles for 2006/2007:

 

Gears of War (this will be huge)

Halo 3 (final chapter before the Peter Jackson film)

Blue Dragon (new RPG series)

Lost Odyssey (another RPG)

CryOn (another RPG)

Crackdown

Ninety-Nine Nights

The Elder Scrolls

Ninja Gaiden 2

Forza

Marvel MMORPG

Mass Effect

Perfect Dark

Shadow Run

Too Human I

Too Human II

Too Human III

Viva Piñata

 

Nintendo should worry, that's a killer line-up of EXCLUSIVE titles. And Sony should be shoving a popsicle stick down their throats already.

[Blue_Ninja0]

or people are just complety stupid

 

The problem is that this is true.

 

The xbox360 possible price drop is actually good because it will force a price drop from nintendo sooner than later. It's good for both nintendo fans and xbox fans.

[Noku]

Gears of War isn't a FPS. It's like Zelda, an action/platformer game but with guns instead of a sword.

 

Here are Xbox 360's flagship titles for 2006/2007:

 

Gears of War (this will be huge)

Halo 3 (final chapter before the Peter Jackson film)

Blue Dragon (new RPG series)

Lost Odyssey (another RPG)

CryOn (another RPG)

Crackdown

Ninety-Nine Nights

The Elder Scrolls

Ninja Gaiden 2

Forza

Marvel MMORPG

Mass Effect

Perfect Dark

Shadow Run

Too Human I

Too Human II

Too Human III

Viva Piñata

 

Nintendo should worry, that's a killer line-up of EXCLUSIVE titles. And Sony should be shoving a popsicle stick down their throats already.

 

 

Though there's some awesomeness in there, it's mainly because of the just the ip's name, not the game that it represents. Saint's Row, Test Drive Unlimited, Dead Rising, Perfect Dark Zero, Chromehounds, Enchanted Arms, PGR3, ... are all examples of fine-looking, much-hyped games. Until you lay hands on them yourself, and realise they're utter crap.

[Teppo Holmqvist]

Saint's Row, Test Drive Unlimited, Dead Rising, Perfect Dark Zero, Chromehounds, Enchanted Arms, PGR3, ... are all examples of fine-looking, much-hyped games.

 

And you can also add much vaunted Ninety-Nine Nights into that list too. And probably also Too Human, as most reviewers who have played it say it is average.

[Caris]

Though there's some awesomeness in there, it's mainly because of the just the ip's name, not the game that it represents. Saint's Row, Test Drive Unlimited, Dead Rising, Perfect Dark Zero, Chromehounds, Enchanted Arms, PGR3, ... are all examples of fine-looking, much-hyped games. Until you lay hands on them yourself, and realise they're utter crap.

 

Er, no.

 

Alot of those are A class games.

[myster0n]

Here are Xbox 360's flagship titles for 2006/2007:

<snip>

Too Human I

Too Human II

Too Human III

<snip>

Now I KNOW you're joking. Silicon Knights, who are not exactly known for their speed, are going to release 3 games in the next ... 15 months ? When, according to IGN, the first one is due in 4 months ?

[Noku]

Saints Row - 83.6%

Test Drive Unlimited - 82.2%

Dead Rising - 85.5%

Project Gotham Racing 3 - 88.4%

 

Yeah... Real Crap.

 

I'm not quoting review-scores, as they are not only subjective (which is fine), but biased.

I'm talking about my experience with those "games."

[pedrocasilva]

First off, I have to say this... Pedro, my dear man, if I were queer and didn't already have a girlfriend, I'd mary you and (try to) have your babies. You rule.

Thanks, I really apreciate the compliment

Saints Row - 83.6%

Test Drive Unlimited - 82.2%

Dead Rising - 85.5%

Project Gotham Racing 3 - 88.4%

 

Yeah... Real Crap.

not crap, but not that good.

 

Anyway...

 

Wii is launching now in Q4 2006, it's still in it's early days, while X360 is maturing after being released in Q4 2005 (a year ago), we're cutting into 2nd generation and most 1st generation games are already out, that's just basic logic; while Wii is in it's first wave of games... and 30 games is pretty good at that, X360 is in it's second wave.

 

X360 launch wasn't that impressive; first there was big shortages and damaged equipment that overheated, scratched discs, etc... They launched first but not without their share of problems, a big share, and that was just bad publicity.

 

Remembering the launch line-up; Perfect Dark Zero is not as good as some would expect (not enough to deserve the name Perfect Dark) and it scored low, it actually, as a 1st party title it got powned in sales and in reviewers scores next to CoD2... that's not good. And PGR3 didn't even run at 720p it was just upscaled (not upscaled from 480p, but...) and the scores weren't those of a system seller aswell.

 

Lastly, all consoles will have good games in their lifespan cicle, it's just that X360 cicle started first so they'll be collecting the loot first.

[Teppo Holmqvist]

Project Gotham Racing 3 - 88.4%

 

The truth is that Project Gotham Racing 3 was overhyped and many reviewers found lots of excuses to give it higher score to it than it really should had. Same was with Perfect Dark Zero where many serious flaws were often ignored by saying "online game is sooo goood" (and even that wasn't that great in reality).

 

And PGR3 didn't even run at 720p it was just upscaled (not upscaled from 480p, but...)

 

And it also had choppy framerate.