Next-Gen Systems: An in-depth look

[Caydr]

I played through that entire game while only using the standard hand phaser.

[SinbadEV]

three great things about Star Trek TNG.

You forgot Picard...

[Zoombie]

Oh right... and Rikers beard. That makes everything.

[Gurkha]

(N64)^3, obviously. Long live cartridges, Long live Goldeneye, Long live the funky 3-prong controller.

[SwiftSpear]

The cube was great but I don't think nintendo can pull off a release that compares to the power specifications of the next gen, they already skimpped off a little on the gamecube and I think that's just the route they are going to have to go with.

And yet many Gamecube games (Metroid Prime, for example, or Wind Waker) were visually more impressive than their cousins on other systems. Not because they had really powerful hardware, but because the authors made really good use of the hardware they had. Sure, Wind Waker's graphics were cartoony, but they looked great and fit the game perfectly. Metroid Prime wasn't Halo, but they managed some magnificent environments that played very well.

Plus, early details on the Revolution say that it'll be close to the same power level as the 360 and PS3. Nintendo's primary cost-saver seems to be the lack of HDTV support. They (rightly, I think) decided that wouldn't really matter until the next generation of consoles after this one.

Last gen nintendo took almost a year to release a console to compeate with the PS2 and more closely compeated with xbox because of it. Thier hardware was unarguably less impressive then the Xbox's was but they undercut the box by about a 100$ for it which gave them a huge compeditive boost.

I think you'd be nuts to say that nintendo will be able to compeate with the power specifications of the PS3, but I don't think they are going to need to. It's pretty obvious that they will be able to undercut the next gen consoles and the delay time between the release of the 360 and the PS3/rev will mean that nintendo will probably have compeditive hareware to match the box, and the price to beat it on a balanced market.

That being said I think sony is far more of a force to be reconned with as the late market developer then the xbox was back in the day. Late market is probably the best spot to hold if the generation doesn't die too quickly. I think both sony and xbox are hoping for a minimum 6 year generation hence why they included HDTV Support now, although microsoft might change up if they get smashed in the market for the early release gamble, but I don't think theyed be willing to risk being the first console out the gate in the future gen after it just burned them in the next gen.

IMO the N64 was the weakest console release that nintendo has ever launched. The 64 was saved by ironclad development might, even though from a hardware presepective it was a total flop compared to the PS. PS had the development titles to steal the market from nintendo when added it's considerable graphical advantage, even though they were compeating with the Rare/nintendo development studios super team. With a more comparable hardware the 64 wouldn't have been smashed anywhere nearly as hard as it was. I still can't say I understand nintendo's eversion to media integration. I think that is the thing that hurt them the most in the current gen because thier hardware was up to spec for competition and thier titles were definately just as solid as it's compeditors.

[Egarwaen]

I think you'd be nuts to say that nintendo will be able to compeate with the power specifications of the PS3, but I don't think they are going to need to. It's pretty obvious that they will be able to undercut the next gen consoles and the delay time between the release of the 360 and the PS3/rev will mean that nintendo will probably have compeditive hareware to match the box, and the price to beat it on a balanced market.

I don't know... The PS3 seems to be trying to do a whole lot of different things, which means it's likely to do none of them well. Power alone doesn't matter. Ease of use for developers and assorted architectural concerns matter too. IIRC, the PS2's raw power was crippled by some really dumb architecture decisions that made doing some things quite painful for developers.

That being said I think sony is far more of a force to be reconned with as the late market developer then the xbox was back in the day. Late market is probably the best spot to hold if the generation doesn't die too quickly.

The problem is that Sony and Microsoft are marketing to hard-core gamers with lots of disposable income. Their technology's built around "Everything we did before, but bigger, better, and flashier". This is a shrinking market. (Lost Garden's had some wonderful analysis of this) Nintendo's aiming for a more casual non-gamer market, and hoping to catch some gamers with retro and sheer nifty.

IMO the N64 was the weakest console release that nintendo has ever launched.

Yes. But it wasn't just hardware-related, though they made some dumb choices there. Corporate policy at the time was mind-bogglingly stupid too, and they drove away most of their good third-party developers.

I still can't say I understand nintendo's eversion to media integration. I think that is the thing that hurt them the most in the current gen because thier hardware was up to spec for competition and thier titles were definately just as solid as it's compeditors.

Well, they weren't really hurt in the current generation. They made a hefty chunk of cash, beat the XBox in Japan and Europe, had solid worldwide sales, and made a lot of hit games that generated a lot of hype. They didn't capture the #1 spot, but that doesn't really matter for much.

Their aversion to media integration is completely understandable. See Convergence is a Great Word to Hate. (Lost Garden again)

[SwiftSpear]

They alienate the "casual gamer" with thier resistance to integrating a DVD player. If I buy a PS2 I get a DVD player and a gaming console, I don't need to get another DVD player now, therefore I have a reason to buy a PS2 even if I don't care that much about the games, or there's only one or two titles I want to play for it. It's getting even better in the next gen where they are integrating virtually everything, so almost all my sound and video feature stuff for my media center can be done on my PS3, even if I have a top of the line sound system and TV.

Nintendo appeals to the casual gamer because of it's lower cost, but only to a small degree, your average gamer poser will jump for the PS2 because it has more integrated features that they will get use out of. Nintendo has really limited thier new generation marketability by refusing to step out onto new grounds with moves like this. They really only sell to nintendo fans, (which is a huge market, and for good reason).

[Egarwaen]

Uhh... Yes and no. The PS2 was kind of an odd case there. A lot of people bought it because it was a PS2, and got a DVD player "for free". This is supposedly one of the factors that lead to rapid DVD adoption. And it may have been one reason why the GC lost out in terms of sales. However, there's a couple of things to consider:

1) Stand-alone DVD players were still fairly expensive at that point. I believe they've gone down in price a fair bit since then.

2) Nintendo's not targetting casual gamers. (Defined by most people as those that play games to relax and have more money than sense.) That's the segment being targetted by the PS3 and XBox 360. They're targetting non-gamers. Most of these people already own a DVD player, and will gain little from having an integrated one. (Though the Revolution might have an integrated DVD player - I don't think they've resolved that question yet.)

[SinbadEV]

I'm pretty sure they were clear that the system will play DVDs and CDs... what I doubt is HD-DVD or BluRay compatibility... which is one thing that is likely to help whoever supports it...

[SwiftSpear]

I'm pretty sure they were clear that the system will play DVDs and CDs... what I doubt is HD-DVD or BluRay compatibility... which is one thing that is likely to help whoever supports it...

Yes and no... Media blue ray/HD-DVD won't take off anywhere near as fast as DVD did. The manufacturing costs are higher and quite frankly you really just don't need that much storage space for film medium media.

There will be precious few users that are acctually won over by the blueray/hd capability of the PS3, and most of them are the hardcore gamers that drool at the specs. The last gen was iffy, but in the next gen it is undoubtable, PS3 is very solidly being marketed to the hardcore gamer crowd and those with more money then sense. Nintendo is going to both tap the classic market of gamers that are nintendo fans, as well as win over the casual gamers because they finally have thier integrated DVD technology in a low cost and in most other ways very intuitive nintendo console.

I'm still throwing my cards in with the PS3 because I know the third party developers that are going to be making for the console and they are going to do some of the most astonishing things beyond what was ever belived to be possible with the PS3's graphical capabilities. The advanced shader technology built into the PS3's hardware is going to do things graphically that were only dreamed of before.