Because Nintendo has consistently released fun games, and Sony hasn't? I know that when I want to relax and have some fun, my Gamecube or DS are what I go for, not my PS2.Zaphod wrote:So why are people voting nintendo?
Next-Gen Systems: An in-depth look
Moderator: Moderators
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
The thing that keeps me playing PC games is internet connectivity and therefore the comunity aspects involved... Favorate console is hands down PS2 in the last gen, and I can't wait to get my hands on a PS3 for exactly that reason. 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. I'm very interested to see what the revolution brings to the table but I feel like I'm banking on a guarenteed supporting the PS3 while the revolution seems like more of a gamble.
From a games prespective I still love nearly every square project. Can't wait to see the next gen versions of kingdom heart, final fantasy, and front mission. Namco's tekken and soulcalibur series both totally own, and polyphony apparenly already has some new material in the works for the next gran tourismo game, which is exciting being that grand tourismo is the funnest game ever made. Love the metal gear series so I'm not losing out anything there, also capcom has announced future resident evil titles being built primarily for PS3 technology. After that thier a half dozen mentionable small titles that will come out that will be tonnes of fun in thier own right... oh, and of course whatever the next GTA title is it will no doubt be for PS3. I can't personally say I'm thrilled with the GTA titles, but it will no doubt be popular. I felt the series kind of peaked out at vice city...
From a games prespective I still love nearly every square project. Can't wait to see the next gen versions of kingdom heart, final fantasy, and front mission. Namco's tekken and soulcalibur series both totally own, and polyphony apparenly already has some new material in the works for the next gran tourismo game, which is exciting being that grand tourismo is the funnest game ever made. Love the metal gear series so I'm not losing out anything there, also capcom has announced future resident evil titles being built primarily for PS3 technology. After that thier a half dozen mentionable small titles that will come out that will be tonnes of fun in thier own right... oh, and of course whatever the next GTA title is it will no doubt be for PS3. I can't personally say I'm thrilled with the GTA titles, but it will no doubt be popular. I felt the series kind of peaked out at vice city...
Low price, fun games, 3d controller, enabling total new game styles..
And I bet ur not on this board for the Spring graphics, now are you?
E: check this page about the controller. And check the movie! It's just awesome!
E2: man, this is gonna be so awesome!
And I bet ur not on this board for the Spring graphics, now are you?
E: check this page about the controller. And check the movie! It's just awesome!
E2: man, this is gonna be so awesome!
This will be just.. so.. freaking.. funntil you turn the controller 90 degrees and it becomes just like an old 8-bit NES joypad, with the D-pad under your left thumb and "a" and "b" under your right. (Don't forget-Nintendo has promised downloadable versions of their classic games for the Revolution's "Virtual Console.")
I'm not quite sure where you get your info from, but any console new to the market costs at LEAST $300USD when it's new. That's how it has been all the way back to NES. Even outside the states, the price will be at LEAST that high, if not more. Nintendo will not release their system for no piddly "150-200", simply because they know it will sell for more. There is no such thing as a next-gen console that goes for under $300USD. period.(revo sells between 200-150)
Expect the PS3 to be at least $450USD.
Do a 5 minutes search and google and check it out. I did and find mutipole sites speculating a price as low as 99$ (unlikly, imo) and an officail quote from the Executive Vice President of Sales of NoA, Reggie Fils-Aime.
"Value has been a key card for us this generation and we'll continue to play it," Fils-Aime told me. "Do I expect us to be at a lower price point than our competition? Yes I do. Have we determined a price yet? No we haven't."
Their competeion being X-box 360 core among other, witch sells at 299$.
And no, many consoles has sold under 300 $. Nintendo have had a long history of doing so.
"
Nintendo 64 launched in 1996 for $199.99
SEGA Dreamcast launches in 1999 for $199.99
Nintendo Entertainment System launched in 1985 for $199.99
GameCube launched in 2001 for $199.99
"
Courtesy of IGN.
Anyway, no official launch price has been released yet, Nintendo has long hinted that it should be under the 299 mark. Besides, it would fit their new style of makeing gaming avibole to anyone, even those who raise an eyebrow when looking at pepole playing Super Mario and GTA.
Gaming is changing. The grapichs limit if coming closer and closer for each generation. We need new mediums. Singstar, DDR and sevral DS games have proven that new ways of gaming SELLS. Nintendo is first on the bandwagon and will hopefully make something we will all love.
"Value has been a key card for us this generation and we'll continue to play it," Fils-Aime told me. "Do I expect us to be at a lower price point than our competition? Yes I do. Have we determined a price yet? No we haven't."
Their competeion being X-box 360 core among other, witch sells at 299$.
And no, many consoles has sold under 300 $. Nintendo have had a long history of doing so.
"
Nintendo 64 launched in 1996 for $199.99
SEGA Dreamcast launches in 1999 for $199.99
Nintendo Entertainment System launched in 1985 for $199.99
GameCube launched in 2001 for $199.99
"
Courtesy of IGN.
Anyway, no official launch price has been released yet, Nintendo has long hinted that it should be under the 299 mark. Besides, it would fit their new style of makeing gaming avibole to anyone, even those who raise an eyebrow when looking at pepole playing Super Mario and GTA.
Gaming is changing. The grapichs limit if coming closer and closer for each generation. We need new mediums. Singstar, DDR and sevral DS games have proven that new ways of gaming SELLS. Nintendo is first on the bandwagon and will hopefully make something we will all love.
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.SwiftSpear wrote: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.
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.
Yeah, I honestly don't see myself having a HDTV in my room in the next two years.Egarwaen wrote: 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.
hmm, I read the revolution has a similar cpu clockspeed to the first xbox, and that it's architecture is pretty much an extended gamecube setup, rather than the redesign ms and sony have gone after, I wouldnt expect ps3 and xbox 360 style graphics on the revolution, not that there wont be any improvement.
You might. Joe Average won't, especially not since the analog UHF channel shutdown was pushed back to early 2009 in the US.Aun wrote:Yeah, I honestly don't see myself having a HDTV in my room in the next two years.
They also appear to have support for resolutions partway between standard and HD, so it will be able to take advantage of HD sets.
As for hardware, Nintendo hasn't released any specs yet. IGN has, but that's IGN. We do know that the CPU and GPU have been developed for the Revolution from the ground up, instead of taking PC hardware designs (with all their compromises and generalizations) and tweaking them.
I need to jump in here... GameCube didn't skimp on graphical prowess... it's can handle more filtered polys per second the PS2 and XBox... in raw power it isn't quite as good as XBox but blow PS2 out of the water...
The point is that the system on the market with the WEAKEST graphics processor and CPU was the PS2 and they have the most market share and are making the most sales of games, while the GameCube, which according to their marketing department has the best graphics of the three Current Gen Systems for acctually gameplay framerate and lowest load times is in last place.
This has taught (rightly so) Nintendo that it's all about the games... PS2 has the most popular games so PS2 get's the sales... even if the developers have to use crappier graphics they'll do it if the games sells.
My point is not that GameCube is a better system, or that I'm not a little disappointed that they arn't pushing the envelope further with the Revolution... what I'm saying is that THEY don't think they skimped on the GameCube and they are basically trying to duplicate the success of the PS2 in the market that kept the DS sold out all christmas for the last 2 years and is desperate for TETRIS, MARIO KART and ANIMAL CROSSING!!!
The point is that the system on the market with the WEAKEST graphics processor and CPU was the PS2 and they have the most market share and are making the most sales of games, while the GameCube, which according to their marketing department has the best graphics of the three Current Gen Systems for acctually gameplay framerate and lowest load times is in last place.
This has taught (rightly so) Nintendo that it's all about the games... PS2 has the most popular games so PS2 get's the sales... even if the developers have to use crappier graphics they'll do it if the games sells.
My point is not that GameCube is a better system, or that I'm not a little disappointed that they arn't pushing the envelope further with the Revolution... what I'm saying is that THEY don't think they skimped on the GameCube and they are basically trying to duplicate the success of the PS2 in the market that kept the DS sold out all christmas for the last 2 years and is desperate for TETRIS, MARIO KART and ANIMAL CROSSING!!!
Only in North America. In Japan it's second (after the PS2). I can't remember the rankings for Europe, but...SinbadEV wrote:the GameCube, which according to their marketing department has the best graphics of the three Current Gen Systems for acctually gameplay framerate and lowest load times is in last place.
Also, note that Nintendo is actually making money in the games business. Microsoft isn't.
Nintendo doesn't seem to care about coming in first. It seems to care about making fun games and making money. It's doing both very well.[/url]
To whoever the guy was that said GC had weakest hardware last gen...
I don't know where I read this, but having played Metroid Prime, I believe it (plus, I'm saying it, so you know it's gotta be true): Gamecube is more powerful than PS2, developers didn't bother to optimize it much because they knew that there were already a trillion people with a PS2 so why really make much of an effort anywhere else? I mean, in some cases PS2 games look better than Xbox games, and clearly xbox has the stronger hardware there.
I'll buy a Rev - I wanna play stuff like the classic old NES/SNES/Genesis/Turbo Graphx/etc games on my new TV. New games have nicer graphics but I'm getting tired of things just getting prettier but being the same thing over and over. Enough with the WW2 FPSs... and FPSs in general, in my opinion. There are just too many made, when only half a dozen per year are worth playing. I can count on one hand the number of straight-FPS games I really enjoyed playing and which offered me something I hadn't done before, repeatedly, over and over.
Max Payne 1/2 for bullet time and especially story
Descent 2 for all-around brilliance, especially in multiplayer
Jedi Outcast for blowing **** up with a lightsaber
FEAR for ai that didn't completely suck
HL2 for Epic-ness
Metroid Prime is more of an adventure title so it's not a pure FPS and doesn't go on the list.
Only reason I go for Spring rather than TA is that Spring is many times easier to develop for and, well, still has a player base that doesn't spend most of their time debating religion. Moving right along...
But how many actually ORIGINAL games can you come up with on those old systems?
Sonic the Hedgehog (#2 in particular was good)
Ristar
All the mario games
Boogerman
Vectorman (THIS WILL BE MY FIRST PURCHASE ONCE I GET ONLINE WITH REV - a truly innovative classic, anyone here should get this)
Super Metroid (second purchase, unless the menu leads me to this one first, in which case it will be right before vectorman ^^)
Keith Courage in the Alpha Zones (a turbographx 16 title, don't feel bad if you haven't heard of it. Good fun though. Sorta anime-ish. No story to speak of)
Goldeneye 64
Cruisin' USA
Wave Race
...my list could go on, but I think I'll start a topic about this instead. (edit: and I did too! Wee-00t-z0rzzzesz http://taspring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4420 )
I don't know where I read this, but having played Metroid Prime, I believe it (plus, I'm saying it, so you know it's gotta be true): Gamecube is more powerful than PS2, developers didn't bother to optimize it much because they knew that there were already a trillion people with a PS2 so why really make much of an effort anywhere else? I mean, in some cases PS2 games look better than Xbox games, and clearly xbox has the stronger hardware there.
I'll buy a Rev - I wanna play stuff like the classic old NES/SNES/Genesis/Turbo Graphx/etc games on my new TV. New games have nicer graphics but I'm getting tired of things just getting prettier but being the same thing over and over. Enough with the WW2 FPSs... and FPSs in general, in my opinion. There are just too many made, when only half a dozen per year are worth playing. I can count on one hand the number of straight-FPS games I really enjoyed playing and which offered me something I hadn't done before, repeatedly, over and over.
Max Payne 1/2 for bullet time and especially story
Descent 2 for all-around brilliance, especially in multiplayer
Jedi Outcast for blowing **** up with a lightsaber
FEAR for ai that didn't completely suck
HL2 for Epic-ness
Metroid Prime is more of an adventure title so it's not a pure FPS and doesn't go on the list.
Only reason I go for Spring rather than TA is that Spring is many times easier to develop for and, well, still has a player base that doesn't spend most of their time debating religion. Moving right along...
But how many actually ORIGINAL games can you come up with on those old systems?
Sonic the Hedgehog (#2 in particular was good)
Ristar
All the mario games
Boogerman
Vectorman (THIS WILL BE MY FIRST PURCHASE ONCE I GET ONLINE WITH REV - a truly innovative classic, anyone here should get this)
Super Metroid (second purchase, unless the menu leads me to this one first, in which case it will be right before vectorman ^^)
Keith Courage in the Alpha Zones (a turbographx 16 title, don't feel bad if you haven't heard of it. Good fun though. Sorta anime-ish. No story to speak of)
Goldeneye 64
Cruisin' USA
Wave Race
...my list could go on, but I think I'll start a topic about this instead. (edit: and I did too! Wee-00t-z0rzzzesz http://taspring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4420 )
Last edited by Caydr on 03 Apr 2006, 06:34, edited 1 time in total.
Damn, you got me there.
Whats another good explody FPS...
hmmm...Gun was pretty cool, but it was more of GTA clone...
hmmm...hmmm.
Star Trek Voyager: Elite Force . Now that was a cool game for us trekkies (Actually i'm more of a Babylon Five fan, but Star Trek is still a pretty pretty cool). Its got the borg. What else more do you want? Oh Q and Data, but other then that its got the three great things about Star Trek TNG.
Whats another good explody FPS...
hmmm...Gun was pretty cool, but it was more of GTA clone...
hmmm...hmmm.
Star Trek Voyager: Elite Force . Now that was a cool game for us trekkies (Actually i'm more of a Babylon Five fan, but Star Trek is still a pretty pretty cool). Its got the borg. What else more do you want? Oh Q and Data, but other then that its got the three great things about Star Trek TNG.