Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Games Revolution

Tags:
  • Console Gaming
  • Games
  • Nintendo
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
May 23, 2005 11:54:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

I traded my GC in last year and got an Xbox partly because the newer games
that were coming out were not on the GC. I really liked that console.

I am considering an Xbox360 however, does anyone know what the games list
for the Revolution will be like? I have not heard any developers mention
any games for that system yet--just Nintendo.

More about : games revolution

May 23, 2005 11:54:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

Xbox 360 doesn't even come out until Decemberish, and not very much is
known about Revolution, so I'd say you have quite a bit of time to find
out and make a decision.

If Revolution is indeed "revolutionary" and easy to develop for, as
Nintendo claims, then 3rd parties may be drawn to develop for the
system.

Also, Revolution will most likely be much less expensive than Xbox 360,
so if your budget is limited you might want a Revolution.

As for Game Junky's claim that Revolution will be "so under powered
compared to the PS3 and Xbox360", the final specs aren't even known on
Revolution. Although it is suspected that Revolution will be the
weaker of the 3 systems, I don't suspect it will be as extreme as Junky
would like you to believe.

Although you can read a wealth of information today, much of it is not
very accurate. I would suggest waiting until Microsoft nears its final
development stages for Xbox360 and until Nintendo reveals details on
Revolution, comparing the pros and cons, and making a decision then.
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 2:11:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

As of right now it seems like a lot of third party developers are steering
clear of the Revolution. It will be so under powered compared to the PS3
and Xbox360 it will make it harder to make most games crossed all 3
platforms since games for the Revolution would have to be paired down so
much.

--
Jeremy Lawson

"Kenneth" <Noname@domain.com> wrote in message
news:_xqke.16444$_f7.14780@trndny01...
> I traded my GC in last year and got an Xbox partly because the newer games
> that were coming out were not on the GC. I really liked that console.
>
> I am considering an Xbox360 however, does anyone know what the games list
> for the Revolution will be like? I have not heard any developers mention
> any games for that system yet--just Nintendo.
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 3:45:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Ryan" <rstruzik@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116891017.112485.268000@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> As for Game Junky's claim that Revolution will be "so under powered
> compared to the PS3 and Xbox360", the final specs aren't even known on
> Revolution. Although it is suspected that Revolution will be the
> weaker of the 3 systems, I don't suspect it will be as extreme as Junky
> would like you to believe.

There's no way Revolution will be underpowered. IBM and ATI are providing
the CPU and GPU respectively, and they are new tech. It's not as if
Nintendo is using off-the-shelf, cheap chips like Sega used to do. They're
having the pieces custom designed like they always do. The Revolution will
be right on the technology curve based on its development timeframe. Given
that it'll be the last of the three to be finalized, it might even be the
MOST powerful. But Nintendo will want a good cost, so we'll see. They've
always produced a cutting-edge machine in the past, and gotten the cost they
wanted so as not to take a bath on the retail side. I don't see why this
time would be any different. Just because Nintendo isn't willing to say the
hardware is powerful doesn't mean it isn't. They downplayed the Gamecube's
specs, too.
I'm sure IBM and ATI will eventually be allowed to brag about what they've
made. Nintendo will still be chirping "graphics don't matter" even though
their machine is as good or better than the competition's--like they did
with the Gamecube.
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 4:36:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Ryan" <rstruzik@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116891017.112485.268000@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> As for Game Junky's claim that Revolution will be "so under powered
> compared to the PS3 and Xbox360", the final specs aren't even known on
> Revolution. Although it is suspected that Revolution will be the
> weaker of the 3 systems, I don't suspect it will be as extreme as Junky
> would like you to believe.

Agreed. While Nintendo is stating that the Revolution will only be 2-3 times
as powerful as the Gamecube, Microsoft and Sony, both notorious for
over-estimating their system's power, are claiming 15 times and 30 times the
power of their current gen systems, respectively. Honestly, which specs
sound more reasonable?

I'm not making any decisions based on the hype. I want to see actual in game
footage from all of the systems before I believe one is so far superior than
another.
--

----
PR Mega X
www.powercore.vze.com
www.commandcenter.vze.com
Anonymous
May 25, 2005 7:36:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"greenyammo" <greenyammo@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ZPBke.121027$Cq2.3041@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> I agree, there is no way Revolution will be underpowered. I'd go so far
> as to say that it will be probably be LESS underpowered in comparison to
> the other two than the PS2 is to the X Box just becuase Sony and
> Microsoft are putting such an emphasis on performance this time around.

> Psycholgically speaking (with a pinch of salt) It's normally the people
> who overbrag about their products who have something to hide.
>
> It's brilliant, it really is.
> Is it? Show me.


Yeah, the old "methinks thou dost protest too much" type of thing. :-)
Unfortunately, Nintendo isn't smart enough to even say "our machine will be
on par". They have to get up on stage and stutter out "it's 2-3 times more
powerful than Gamecube" when the competition is saying "35 times".
Anonymous
May 27, 2005 1:22:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Leon Dexter" <leondexterNOSPAM@earthlink.net> writes:
> Yeah, the old "methinks thou dost protest too much" type of thing. :-)
> Unfortunately, Nintendo isn't smart enough to even say "our machine will be
> on par". They have to get up on stage and stutter out "it's 2-3 times more
> powerful than Gamecube" when the competition is saying "35 times".

Or, to put it another way, nintendo is too honest to lie through their
teeth like sony/ms.

Is honesty stupid in today's business environment? I suppose so...

-Miles
--
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
--Albert Einstein
Anonymous
May 27, 2005 1:22:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Miles Bader" <miles@gnu.org> wrote in message
news:874qcpsek2.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp...
> "Leon Dexter" <leondexterNOSPAM@earthlink.net> writes:
> > Yeah, the old "methinks thou dost protest too much" type of thing. :-)
> > Unfortunately, Nintendo isn't smart enough to even say "our machine will
be
> > on par". They have to get up on stage and stutter out "it's 2-3 times
more
> > powerful than Gamecube" when the competition is saying "35 times".
>
> Or, to put it another way, nintendo is too honest to lie through their
> teeth like sony/ms.
>
> Is honesty stupid in today's business environment? I suppose so...

That's not honesty, that's pessimism or just plain stupidity. Without
knowing anything about Revolution's specs, I promise you that "2-3 times" is
a poor choice. Pick any important component, and it'll be more of a jump
than that. Clock frequency, bus bandwidth, memory or texture bandwidth,
polygon count, etc, etc. The only thing I can think of that will only be a
2-3 times jump is the display resolution. If they only wanted 2-3 times the
performance of Gamecube in ANY other area, they wouldn't need to be paying
for custom silicon. They could get that kind of performace from existing
IBM and ATI parts for dirt-cheap prices. There's no way the new custom
parts they're paying for won't be a huge jump over the Gamecube's
capabilities.
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 7:16:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Leon Dexter" <leondexterNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1Yule.505$s64.302@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Miles Bader" <miles@gnu.org> wrote in message
> news:874qcpsek2.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp...
>> "Leon Dexter" <leondexterNOSPAM@earthlink.net> writes:
>> > Yeah, the old "methinks thou dost protest too much" type of thing. :-)
>> > Unfortunately, Nintendo isn't smart enough to even say "our machine
>> > will
> be
>> > on par". They have to get up on stage and stutter out "it's 2-3 times
> more
>> > powerful than Gamecube" when the competition is saying "35 times".
>>
>> Or, to put it another way, nintendo is too honest to lie through their
>> teeth like sony/ms.
>>
>> Is honesty stupid in today's business environment? I suppose so...
>
> That's not honesty, that's pessimism or just plain stupidity. Without
> knowing anything about Revolution's specs, I promise you that "2-3 times"
> is
> a poor choice. Pick any important component, and it'll be more of a jump
> than that. Clock frequency, bus bandwidth, memory or texture bandwidth,
> polygon count, etc, etc. The only thing I can think of that will only be
> a
> 2-3 times jump is the display resolution. If they only wanted 2-3 times
> the
> performance of Gamecube in ANY other area, they wouldn't need to be paying
> for custom silicon. They could get that kind of performace from existing
> IBM and ATI parts for dirt-cheap prices. There's no way the new custom
> parts they're paying for won't be a huge jump over the Gamecube's
> capabilities.
>
>
Maybe they're talking about the overall visual impact or "user experience".
Even though the Xbox 360 and PS3 may be 35 times more powerful the graphics
aren't going to be 35 times as "good". Neither is the AI, physics or sound.
Of course measuring on anything other than raw measurements is highly
subjective, how many times more powerful is the Xbox to the PS2 if you just
look at games running on the two consoles side by side. To produce something
that looks "twice as good" as the games we have today is going to take a
machine that is far more than twice as powerful in raw performance terms.
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 7:16:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"John Smith" <loopback@localhost> wrote in message
news:429c0f4e$0$5105$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-

> Maybe they're talking about the overall visual impact or "user
experience".
> Even though the Xbox 360 and PS3 may be 35 times more powerful the
graphics
> aren't going to be 35 times as "good". Neither is the AI, physics or
sound.
> Of course measuring on anything other than raw measurements is highly
> subjective, how many times more powerful is the Xbox to the PS2 if you
just
> look at games running on the two consoles side by side. To produce
something
> that looks "twice as good" as the games we have today is going to take a
> machine that is far more than twice as powerful in raw performance terms.


Actually, they've now tried to do a little damage control, claiming that was
a mis-quote. They should take lessons from Microsoft on damage control,
though--I've seen a couple of tiny blurbs of clarification from Nintendo,
while Microsoft has every PR man they've got doing interviews, talking down
Sony and spinning their definition of 'backward compatibility', praising
their specs, making excuses for their poor E3 showing, sending out
propaganda...it's quite a show.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 2:17:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube (More info?)

"Game Junky" <gamejunky@insightbb.com> wrote in message news:o yske.323$g66.231@attbi_s71...
> As of right now it seems like a lot of third party developers are steering
> clear of the Revolution. It will be so under powered compared to the PS3
> and Xbox360 it will make it harder to make most games crossed all 3
> platforms since games for the Revolution would have to be paired down so
> much.

And these claims are based on.....?
!