• Forum Moderator applications are now open! If you're interested in joining an active team of moderators for one of the biggest Pokémon forums on the internet, click here for info.

Revolution specs

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can't do an AMD vs. Intel direct comparison with those specs. For all we know, we could be comparing a 792 Mhz PowerPC CPU with a 733 Mhz Celeron.
 
I'm disappointed we won't be seeing games that look good as Call of Duty 2 on the Revolution. I hear the controller feels almost like a keyboard and mouse configuration on first person shooters.

So this puts the Revolution somewhere between the X-Box and the X-Box 360. Decent and not too bad, but still leaves a lot to be desired. I'm sure F.E.A.R. and Quake 4 will run on this thing.

I hope the GPU is pack-loaded with shaders.
 
Last edited:
I think the revolution is your 'recycled' machine of the gaming world don't get me wrong I love nintendo as much as the other guy but they are the only ones who dont go all out for the power machines. In comparison to ps3 and the 360 the 'revoltuion' is a bicycle amongst race cars. I think the best thing they've made is the ds and I find myself playing more psp than that these days so I would love to see nintendo have a go at making a proper console.
 
Nintendo don't care about power. It was summed up pretty well at GDC last week: "video games are meant to be just one thing--fun."

That said, I agree that it would still be nice to see something near the Xbox 360. Power and graphics alongside the innovations and fun would be a combination to make Sony and Microsoft start worrying. After all, how can you gain the market if the market thinks what you are offering isn't good enough?

And doodler, the Revolution is a proper console.
 
That's a matter of opinion. If I wanted to (which I do not) get and updated (not by much) version of the gamecube then I would go for the 'revolution'. As much as I hate sony at least the way their console and the 360 is designed they can cater for both hardcore gamers and novices. Nintendo is in my opinion one dimentional. The shame of it is the only console that nintendo has ever made worth having in my opinion was the n64 and the snes. And even they aren't that far below the gamecube.
 
doodler243 said:
If I wanted to (which I do not) get and updated (not by much) version of the gamecube then I would go for the 'revolution'. As much as I hate sony at least the way their console and the 360 is designed they can cater for both hardcore gamers and novices. Nintendo is in my opinion one dimentional.
Click to expand...
Are we talking about the same company? Just look at the controller. It is designed to make it easy for novices to get to grips with games while adding to the complexity for the hardcore gamers. Compare that to all the buttons on the Gamecube controller. Nintendo decided to cut it down and that is what they have done.

To add to this, Nintendo are expanding their audience even more with games such as Nintendogs and Brain Training. They are hardly being one dimensional.
 
Lol ok so brain training and nintendogs are so different from their previous target audience? so different from Super Monkey Ball Touch & Roll, ping pals, Chibi-Robo,Pac-Man,Chaos Field...
hmmmm......:ohdear: didn't think so. And as for the controller being for both novices and experienced gamers no offence but I think everyone knows what the function of a remote is for and when you use a remote it's temporary distraction for the real thing and the attempt of their simplified controller just looks like an empty shell plus it looks like a first generation concept. Tradition is there for a reason it feels good works better and more importantly carries out it's function in comfort.
 
3MB video RAM? That has to be a typo...
 
While some here criticize Nintendo's lower-end specs, Nintendo is laughing all the way to the bank.

Every X-Box 360 Microsoft sells costs THEM something like $170. The PS3 will also be sold at a loss when it comes out (whenever that is).

Nintendo makes a profit on every console they sell. Since they've already admitted they are not competing head-to-head with Sony and MS, this is logical.

Nintendo is building something that focuses on having fun games rather than good graphics (which is what many games seem to be these days IMO). I, for one, have more fun playing older, simpler games than all these shooters and whatnot. With the exception of Pokemon, a lot of games Nintendo makes are the kind where you can just sit down and start having fun, rather than having to sit around and build up a character or go through some long confusing storyline.

Say what you will, regardless of which console is most popular or has the best anything, Nintendo will come out ahead yet again, as they will be making a profit where the others won't.

- Trip
 
Trip said:
While some here criticize Nintendo's lower-end specs, Nintendo is laughing all the way to the bank.

Every X-Box 360 Microsoft sells costs THEM something like $170. The PS3 will also be sold at a loss when it comes out (whenever that is).

Nintendo makes a profit on every console they sell. Since they've already admitted they are not competing head-to-head with Sony and MS, this is logical.

Nintendo is building something that focuses on having fun games rather than good graphics (which is what many games seem to be these days IMO). I, for one, have more fun playing older, simpler games than all these shooters and whatnot. With the exception of Pokemon, a lot of games Nintendo makes are the kind where you can just sit down and start having fun, rather than having to sit around and build up a character or go through some long confusing storyline.

Say what you will, regardless of which console is most popular or has the best anything, Nintendo will come out ahead yet again, as they will be making a profit where the others won't.

- Trip
Click to expand...

Yeah no offence but everyone know's about the selling at a loss thing most companies sell their product at a loss and make up the money by other means. And as for

'Nintendo is building something that focuses on having fun games rather than good graphics (which is what many games seem to be these days IMO). I, for one, have more fun playing older, simpler games than all these shooters and whatnot'

Both sony and microsoft have games that cater for all ages and not just 'shooters' microsoft :shenmue,top spin,vexx, soul calibur, dance uk amped, viva pinyada...
Sony: tekken tag, virtua fighter, ninja turtles, fatal inertia, motor storm,smackdown (dont really like sony so dont know much of their games) point is they are all games that you can sit down and play. And finally as for nintendo coming out ahead go and check your facts microsoft and sony are bigger corporations than nintendo so they can afford to spend and loose money nintendo are more cautious and play the safe route which is investing in more childish based games (which isn't bad) but needs to be more broadened and next generation in both games and console.
 
I don't know about those games, you can't just sit down and play a fighter...you have to memorize move sets and then execute them perfectly to beat both the CPU and a human opponent. Shenmue never seemed to me to be "all ages".

All I see from both of them is how real a FPS shooter can look, so that's what I'm going with. I don't see them tauting how good their RPG systems are, how good the game plays at all. They seem to be "Look at the shiny new graphics".

Nintendo knows what they are doing. They are making games, not shiny baubles. Nintendo has many gave you just pick up and play, like Nintendogs...just pick it up and play. Kirby's Canvas Curse, just pick it up and play it. With all the other systems, it's how complex we can make this game.

Also, because they don't "have the stats" of the other consoles, they probably won't wear out as fast, crash as much and generally have all the problems that plague XBox360 and PS3.
 
doodler243 said:
Yeah no offence but everyone know's about the selling at a loss thing most companies sell their product at a loss and make up the money by other means.
Click to expand...

And that's not a terribly good business model either. That means that for months or even years, the company is operating in the red, at least in that section. Meanwhile, Nintendo has been and will continue to be operating in the black.

And finally as for nintendo coming out ahead go and check your facts microsoft and sony are bigger corporations than nintendo so they can afford to spend and loose money nintendo are more cautious and play the safe route which is investing in more childish based games (which isn't bad) but needs to be more broadened and next generation in both games and console.
Click to expand...

No they don't. Nintendo is going after a different market. Microsoft and Sony are going after the "oooh pretty" market of people who are dedicated high-end gamers.

Nintendo is targetting those on stricter budgets, those who aren't gamers (HINT - a LOT of people), and parents who grew up on the video games of the 80's. Plus--Nintendo's innovating. Sony and Microsoft are just doing more of the same, only upgraded, while Nintendo has a new controller for the Revolution and other new input methods (like the mic and touchscreen on the DS).

Personally, I intend to get a DS in the future. It looks like much more fun and like it has many more titles than the PSP does. I know several people with PSPs, and you know what they do with them? Watch movies off memory sticks or listen to music. I've only seen one of them ever play a game. I already HAVE an Digital Audio/Video Player, why would I want another one that costs more and has poorer battery life, plus is made by (ugh) Sony?

I know this is getting off-topic, but I'm making a point. Nintendo is targetting those who aren't already gamers, or were gamers in the past but aren't anymore. This is an untapped market. Plus the fact that many current gamers are past gamers (Nintendo's putting a bunch of classic Sega/Nintendo games on an online service for the Revolution), means that many current gamers may buy a Revolution + (360/PS3).

So yes, Nintendo is in much better shape than MS and Sony.

- Trip
 
To put the whole profits thing in perspective....Nintendo last year made more profit than did the entire Sony corperation put together.

As far as the whole architecture of the consoles....the Gamecube was as powerful, argueably more powerful, than the XBox360. Given known specs and architecture, the Rev is at least 3/4 as powerful as the 360. I know this all sounds weird if you think in terms of the Mhz myth, or the MB myth (you can have less RAM if it's faster and better quality, something Nintendo has done with both GC and Rev), but these are the simple facts.

So honestly...what are you complaining about? RE4 and Zelda: Twilight Princess both look amazing, and they're only GC games. So the Rev games might not look exactly as pretty as the 360 games? So what? Toning down the graphics even only slightly reduces massive amounts of load on the system. The Revolution hardware won't have any problem playing the same games you'll see on other consoles.

Oh, and Swifty? There's already been a Call of Duty title announced as a Revolution exclusive launch title.
 
Archaic said:
So honestly...what are you complaining about? RE4 and Zelda: Twilight Princess both look amazing, and they're only GC games. So the Rev games might not look exactly as pretty as the 360 games? So what? Toning down the graphics even only slightly reduces massive amounts of load on the system. The Revolution hardware won't have any problem playing the same games you'll see on other consoles.
Click to expand...
I'm not so much concerned with graphics. I'm mostly concerned with processing power.

We're seeing a diminishing rate of returns on the amount of work and money in graphics as we're moving onwards. Though we may be hitting the ceiling when it comes to graphics, the industry still has a lot to go in terms of the internal mechanics of game engines and artificial intelligence. It may not matter that the Revolution will have the prettiest games on the market, but how are we so sure that we'll be guaranteed more advanced game mechanics we've been seeing on the latest games such as physics engines, advanced artificial intelligence, better handling of larger resources? Sure I'm sure developers will find a way to squeeze and optimize their games for all they're worth for better performance, but at the same time, developers will also do the same thing with the Playstation 3 and X-Box 360. Sure, let's rate the Revolution in terms of potential, but then again, you're going to have to be fair and also start rating the other systems in terms of potential as well.

I understand Nintendo is trying to push for a system that's not as powerful as their competitor's and are making up for it with an innovative control scheme, but why not try trumphing the competitor's in both aspects placed at the tip of the spearhead? Why not have a viably competitive system and have an excellent and promising control scheme?

No doubt, Nintendo is going to succeed alongside this generation by staying out of Microsoft and Sony's battlefield. However, it leaves a lot to be desired when you start thinking, "Oh wow, this RTS, FPS, or RPG plays really well with this controller... Just imagine how awesome this game would look if it had pixel shaders, bump-mapping, a better physics engine, etc." Did losing good graphics have to be at the expense of having an awesome controller? Can't I have both good graphics and an awesome controller?
 
Trip said:
And that's not a terribly good business model either. That means that for months or even years, the company is operating in the red, at least in that section. Meanwhile, Nintendo has been and will continue to be operating in the black.



No they don't. Nintendo is going after a different market. Microsoft and Sony are going after the "oooh pretty" market of people who are dedicated high-end gamers.

Nintendo is targetting those on stricter budgets, those who aren't gamers (HINT - a LOT of people), and parents who grew up on the video games of the 80's. Plus--Nintendo's innovating. Sony and Microsoft are just doing more of the same, only upgraded, while Nintendo has a new controller for the Revolution and other new input methods (like the mic and touchscreen on the DS).

Personally, I intend to get a DS in the future. It looks like much more fun and like it has many more titles than the PSP does. I know several people with PSPs, and you know what they do with them? Watch movies off memory sticks or listen to music. I've only seen one of them ever play a game. I already HAVE an Digital Audio/Video Player, why would I want another one that costs more and has poorer battery life, plus is made by (ugh) Sony?

I know this is getting off-topic, but I'm making a point. Nintendo is targetting those who aren't already gamers, or were gamers in the past but aren't anymore. This is an untapped market. Plus the fact that many current gamers are past gamers (Nintendo's putting a bunch of classic Sega/Nintendo games on an online service for the Revolution), means that many current gamers may buy a Revolution + (360/PS3).

So yes, Nintendo is in much better shape than MS and Sony.

- Trip
Click to expand...

Again all you're coming out with is unproven and airy statements

I have a ds and loved it when I bought it first because I couldn't wait for games like pokemon and metroid but after the long wait it's been gathering dust. Whereas I dislike sony but got a psp as a present and have been using it for gaming and watching my anime's when i'm out.

'Nintendo is targetting those on stricter budgets, those who aren't gamers (HINT - a LOT of people), and parents who grew up on the video games of the 80's. Plus--Nintendo's innovating. Sony and Microsoft are just doing more of the same, only upgraded, while Nintendo has a new controller for the Revolution and other new input methods (like the mic and touchscreen on the DS).'

Now if that's the truth and nintendo is being so 'innovative' as you put it look at the 'game & watch' and the 'atari 7800' and tell me that nintendo is original, innovation is about introducing something new.
And I love how people go on about how nintendo are thinking about their customers if that's true why is it that they have the common process of making a system as rubbish as they can then later refresh it with brighter lights shinier look .....and sell it for a higher price in the same generation. Game Boy, Game Boy Pocket, Game Boy Light, Game Boy Color, Game Boy Advance(GBA), Game Boy Advance SP, Game Boy micro. I remember buying my gameboy then not long after they released the pocket. Then I bought my gameboy sp then they released the ds not long after now it's ds lite. Nintendo has always done that even with the super nintendo and famicom.

'No they don't. Nintendo is going after a different market. Microsoft and Sony are going after the "oooh pretty" market of people who are dedicated high-end gamers.'

What and nintendo can't be accused of making their console look pretty too?. Not just that if that is the case why is it that microsoft, a company that only came into the gaming world a year ago has already established it's place amogst the big players. Because people especially in europe and america like their fresh and new ideas ninja gaiden,halo,crimson skies,amped2... they might not be games you would play but they have put microsoft where they are in the industry. Microsoft isn't just going for the 'high-end' gamers, for a company that's only just come onto the gaming scene I think it's doing pretty darn well considering it suffered in japan and still managed to outsell nintendo.

By the way I agree with swifty aswell if nintendo is going for innovation and so on why must it take away from something else. If they have the money made from profits why is it they're not giving their fan base something that's powerful and innovative why?...because they want to keep that money in their pockets for themselves it's not about thinking what their fans would enjoy it's about nintendo doesn't risk anything they play the safe card.
 
Last edited:
Now if that's the truth and nintendo is being so 'innovative' as you put it look at the 'game & watch' and the 'atari 7800' and tell me that nintendo is original, innovation is about introducing something new.
Click to expand...
Where have you seen the Revolution controller before? Or an analogue stick before the N64? Or a touch screen on a handheld console? Nintendo are taking gaming to new areas. How hard is it to see that?

And I love how people go on about how nintendo are thinking about their customers if that's true why is it that they have the common process of making a system as rubbish as they can then later refresh it with brighter lights shinier look .....and sell it for a higher price in the same generation. Game Boy, Game Boy Pocket, Game Boy Light, Game Boy Color, Game Boy Advance(GBA), Game Boy Advance SP, Game Boy micro. I remember buying my gameboy then not long after they released the pocket. Then I bought my gameboy sp then they released the ds not long after now it's ds lite.
Click to expand...
All your examples are handhelds. How many versions of the Gamecube are there other than the different colours? The point isn't to get people to collect them all. It is to interest new buyers. I have no intentions on buying a Micro but its design is bringing in new buyers. Seriously, I only have a basic GBA and DS and it's all I will need.

What and nintendo can't be accused of making their console look pretty too?.
Click to expand...
That is one thing that Nintendo can't be critisised of. They done a brilliant job on the appearance of the Revolution. Trip was talking about graphics and that is what Sony and Microsoft are priding themselves on. Games that look good.

... they might not be games you would play but they have put microsoft where they are in the industry. I think it's doing pretty darn well considering it suffered in japan and still managed to outsell nintendo.
Click to expand...
The GBA SP was outselling Microsoft in Japan when the GBA Micro was released. Nintendo are doing very well in Japan. Possibly because the Japanese are more willing to accept their ideas than the average Western gamer.

it's not about thinking what their fans would enjoy it's about nintendo doesn't risk anything they play the safe card.
Click to expand...
"Video games are meant to be just one thing--fun."

That was the message given to game developers for the Revolution. Nintendo sees enjoyment as the first priority. And really, going for innovation over power is far more risky than what Sony or Microsoft are doing.

Really, it is attitudes like yours that are the main problem. Unfortunately, it is far too common and I think Nintendo may be underestimating that a little.
 
FabuVinny said:
Where have you seen the Revolution controller before? Or an analogue stick before the N64? Or a touch screen on a handheld console? Nintendo are taking gaming to new areas. How hard is it to see that?

All your examples are handhelds. How many versions of the Gamecube are there other than the different colours? The point isn't to get people to collect them all. It is to interest new buyers. I have no intentions on buying a Micro but its design is bringing in new buyers. Seriously, I only have a basic GBA and DS and it's all I will need.

That is one thing that Nintendo can't be critisised of. They done a brilliant job on the appearance of the Revolution. Trip was talking about graphics and that is what Sony and Microsoft are priding themselves on. Games that look good.

The GBA SP was outselling Microsoft in Japan when the GBA Micro was released. Nintendo are doing very well in Japan. Possibly because the Japanese are more willing to accept their ideas than the average Western gamer.

"Video games are meant to be just one thing--fun."

That was the message given to game developers for the Revolution. Nintendo sees enjoyment as the first priority. And really, going for innovation over power is far more risky than what Sony or Microsoft are doing.

Really, it is attitudes like yours that are the main problem. Unfortunately, it is far too common and I think Nintendo may be underestimating that a little.
Click to expand...

'Where have you seen the Revolution controller before? Or an analogue stick before the N64? Or a touch screen on a handheld console? Nintendo are taking gaming to new areas. How hard is it to see that?'

Ahem .... touch screen has been around way before the Ds just not corporated in the gaming industry don't get me wrong at first I thought it was brilliant but like a lot of people I know iv'e gotten bored of it because it becomes tiresome trivial and tedious. And as for taking gaming to new areas I can see that yeah. However if I took two tin cans paint and design it with the best colour scheme, stuck a wire in them and called it a cheaper alternative to communication takes it to a new area but doesn't make it advanced.

'All your examples are handhelds. How many versions of the Gamecube are there other than the different colours? The point isn't to get people to collect them all. It is to interest new buyers. I have no intentions on buying a Micro but its design is bringing in new buyers. Seriously, I only have a basic GBA and DS and it's all I will need.'

Of course and why is that?.. simple because their handhelds have done way better than the gamecube. They do it with consoles that do well on the market famicom, and since then the handhelds. The 64 failed to over reach their previous generation in sales has have the gamecube.

'The GBA SP was outselling Microsoft in Japan when the GBA Micro was released. Nintendo are doing very well in Japan. Possibly because the Japanese are more willing to accept their ideas than the average Western gamer.'

Quote me where did I say 'nintendo isn't doing very well in japan'? or anything along those lines. Everyone knows why sony and nintendo in particular do well in Japan and in my opinion it's got more to do with politics than anything else.

Lol lol lol....wait...lol ok:
attitude's like mines? lol .. tell me what my attitude is. Considering the fact I have had almost every nintendo console so I know what I look for from nintendo and in my opinion they have neglected a section of their fan base. The only thing I look to nintendo for these days are the pokemon,zelda and maybe the metroid frachize. And those are the only reason I have the necessary consoles other wise I don't play them at all so care to elaborate on this 'attitude'? thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom