Next Generation Consoles

[XanBcoo]

Originally posted by: Gamespot
Gates was quoted by Time magazine as saying that Halo 3 would be released at the same time as Sony's PlayStation 3, which is due later this year. Execs at Microsoft and developers at Bungie both scratched their heads at the statement, with Microsoft's president of the entertainment and devices division, Robbie Bach, bluntly saying, "Halo 3 is something that we'll ship when it's ready."

Gates admitted that his statement may have been premature. "It's up to the team [at Bungie] when they want to ship [Halo 3], and they're going to take their time to make that a super great product," Gates told Engadget. "So even we don't know when that will come out." Gates' comments already have industry pundits predicting that the game will likely now launch either in November, as have previous Halos, or around the premiere of the Halo movie in summer 2007.

I love it. Gates trying to be a smart, cut-throat businessman, and everyone else: "No. Just...no."

That's good news for Halo fans like me. I won't be buying an XBox360, but I will enjoy the game to no end on everyone else's. It kinda bothered me when I first heard the game's release would be affected by the PS3's. It would be beneficial for Microsoft, but they hardly had the fans in mind.

[el_boss]

Originally posted by: Turkish-S

Wow, I did not know that the PS3 was that big.

The Revolution is a little interseting. The fact that they will be able to compete with the PS3 and 360 (in graphics that is), with a console that is about 1/4 of their sizes is pretty neat.

[Assertn]

They made it pretty clear that they weren't going to compete with sony and microsoft for graphics capacity. The plus side? Those of us who follow nintendo don't really give a shit about the boost in realism between the two newest generations, and would prefer the console costing half as much (which the revolution probably will) anyway.

[Ryllharu]

That, and developers will find it cheaper to produce on, meaning quality games with shorter production periods, and therefore (hopefully) more games in a shorter period of time. Money, which according to Tim Schafer and other innovative designers, is a big deciding factor in what gets a Green Light. Developers will be able to take bigger risks with the Revolution's games. The Revolution will have good 3rd party support this time around.

Who wants to play a game that looks great, but took 5 years to develop, costs $60-70, won't be innovative because they need to make up for the development costs and the market's reluctance to pay $70 for a shitty game so they have to tailor it to sell big (i.e. Sports, GTA-clone, FPS), but on the plus side, has smarter AI thanks to the processors? I'll take innovation, a cheaper price tag, and shorter development time any day.

With the controller, the Revolution has built-in innovative game play mechanics waiting to be exploited. It won't be so much of a risk because the revolution was made to be used that way.

That, and I'll beat Zelda: A Link to the Past 80 more times.

The PS3 on the other hand, still doesn't have final specs (since the ones the gave out aren't believable with the 'under $400' claim they made), runs out of a PC sized box for now (yeah, those proposed components really fit into that box as of right now) and they claim it's coming out in Spring? IGN posted this image a while back I'm sure this image is already in this thread, but that's bigger than most large PC cases.

Enjoy the $500+ price tag on it, I'll spend my extra 300 bucks on new games and awesome old classics.

[el_boss]

@Ryllharu: Are you saying that it will be impossible to make "ugly" games that don't utilize the entire power of the PS3 or 360? Why would a company choose to make a game for the revolution just because it won't need to look good?

My prediction is that developers will be to lazy to come up with innovative ways to use the controller. I really hope that they prove me wrong though.

Originally posted by: AssertnFailure
Those of us who follow nintendo don't really give a shit about the boost in realism between the two newest generations, and would prefer the console costing half as much (which the revolution probably will) anyway.

That sounds awfully close to fanboy-ism.

[Assertn]

Originally posted by: el_boss
@Ryllharu: Are you saying that it will be impossible to make "ugly" games that don't utilize the entire power of the PS3 or 360? Why would a company choose to make a game for the revolution just because it won't need to look good?

People who buy PS3s and 360s will gauge the visual quality of the marketable games to whatever release raises the bar the farthest. Are you saying that you never look at a shitty 3rd party game and wonder why the graphics look so much worse than the more hyped-up 1st party ones? People won't buy a PS3 to play games that belong on a PS2.

That sounds awfully close to fanboy-ism.

That sounds awfully close to asking me if i care.

[Ryllharu]

Wouldn't people just complain that it was a bad game for not utilizing the full functionality of the 360 or PS3?

The production companies aren't concerned with the smaller group of people that play a game for good story or game mechanics, they're after the market as a whole (for the most part). The goal of the more powerful of the next gen systems is realism, the "great" looking games will be the big sellers.

People will make "ugly" games for the other two systems, it will just take much longer to make the good ones. The hastily made games will come out sooner, and unfortunately be inferior to all the games we'll end up waiting years for.

[el_boss]

I'm really sick of the notion all the good games only are released on Nintendos consoles. It seems like people forget that Nintendo also is a company who is out to earn money. The only reason they pretend to care about their fans is to get money from them. Nintendo isn't different from Sony or Microsoft, they all have the same goal. Stop thinking that Nintendo is you loveable uncle or something.

I don't think that PS3 and 360 owners will complain if the games don't have maximal graphics. There are at least as many people that want innovative gameplay and good story buying games for the PS3 and 360 as for the Revolution. It seems also that you have mixed up the terms bad graphics and bad design. Design is obviously what is important, if that is good people will not care if the graphics are not top-of-the-line.

Originally posted by: AssertnFailure
That sounds awfully close to asking me if i care.

No, it was not a question.

[Assertn]

Originally posted by: el_boss
I'm really sick of the notion all the good games only are released on Nintendos consoles. It seems like people forget that Nintendo also is a company who is out to earn money. The only reason they pretend to care about their fans is to get money from them. Nintendo isn't different from Sony or Microsoft, they all have the same goal. Stop thinking that Nintendo is you loveable uncle or something.

Excuse me? Well that's a first. Usually the so-called "fanboyism" is applied to a person who chooses not to conform to the popular notion that Nintendo's games are inferior. I buy Nintendo games because they're fun, not because I feel that Mayamoto loves me. That was perhaps the most random and groundless statement you've ever said, el_boss.

I don't think that PS3 and 360 owners will complain if the games don't have maximal graphics. There are at least as many people that want innovative gameplay and good story buying games for the PS3 and 360 as for the Revolution. It seems also that you have mixed up the terms bad graphics and bad design. Design is obviously what is important, if that is good people will not care if the graphics are not top-of-the-line.

So tell me....what makes PS3 better than PS2, if graphics aren't your priority? Seriously.

[el_boss]

Originally posted by: AssertnFailure

Originally posted by: el_boss
I'm really sick of the notion all the good games only are released on Nintendos consoles. It seems like people forget that Nintendo also is a company who is out to earn money. The only reason they pretend to care about their fans is to get money from them. Nintendo isn't different from Sony or Microsoft, they all have the same goal. Stop thinking that Nintendo is you loveable uncle or something.

Excuse me? Well that's a first. Usually the so-called "fanboyism" is applied to a person who chooses not to conform to the popular notion that Nintendo's games are inferior. I buy Nintendo games because they're fun, not because I feel that Mayamoto loves me. That was perhaps the most random and groundless statement you've ever said, el_boss.

Who says that Nintendos games are inferior? I just don't think that they are neccessarily superior. I was referring to this.

Originally posted by: Ryllharu
The production companies aren't concerned with the smaller group of people that play a game for good story or game mechanics, they're after the market as a whole (for the most part). The goal of the more powerful of the next gen systems is realism, the "great" looking games will be the big sellers.

Maybe I misunderstood him, but that was the notion I got. You can't deny that there is a general feeling toward Nintendo, that they are the "nice-guys" in this business.

Originally posted by: AssertnFailure
So tell me....what makes PS3 better than PS2, if graphics aren't your priority? Seriously.

Can you play the PS3 games on a PS2? If so, I will probably not buy a PS3, not right away at least.

[milfhunter]

Nintendo has announced a redesign of Nintendo DS. The new version will be called DS Lite.



The DS Lite name bares dual meaning. It will weigh lighter, and the screen will be brighter.

I personally prefer the current design, but a brighter screen and a lighter build are always welcome.

EDIT: If this comes in black, it will totally shit all over PSP even more. It will be like diarrhea. Oh God, that would be so awesome.

[RedX1z]

personally, i like the design for first one better. also, how much brighter does it have to be? it's more than plenty bright enough. i was wondering, does it have any new features that rumors had?

[milfhunter]

The only rumor I know of regarding Nintendo is that they plan on renovating all the classic titles that will be available for download on the Revolution. I think that Nintendo will pretty much have to add new content in games like new dungeons, puzzles, and levels because their games are already being pirated on PC, Xbox, and PSP. It's fucked up, but Nintendo might not even bother redoing the games, anyway. If they do, then it will close the debate on whether Nintendo cares about its fanbase or not. Personally, I think it's good enough that they even decided to have virtual consoles.

I just want more news on the PS3 to come out now. MGS3: Subsistence is going to start taking pre-orders in mid-February with a limited special edition release, and MGS4 is going to be the final chapter in the Metal Gear saga.

[Assertn]

You mean like all those GBA remakes nintendo released?

If they go through the effort of updating all the graphics, then they're gonna charge like, $30 per game.

[RedX1z]

i don't they'll charge that much, that's too much..

nintendo seems like the type that gives more fun for less.

[milfhunter]

I'm extremely worried about how much they'll charge. I can totally see Nintendo going chauvinist N64-style and charging as much as $40 a download.

Nintendo's execs have already acknowledged the Revolution's superior strength against Xbox Live Arcade due to the breadth of 20 years worth of classic titles alone. They'll just be like, "Oh, you wanna keep playing Geometry Wars? Go ahead. Tetris Attack on SNES is gonna cost you like ... $25, though. Run your pockets." And then they're gonna go Maddox on us and be like, "You're not doing us a favor by spending $25 on Tetris Attack. We're doing you a favor by letting you download it for only $25. You can probably find a copy of it on eBay for $5 if you prefer, but then you'll need a SNES console too. And sure, you can emulate it illegally on your PC. But how do you feel when you use your new $250 64-bit AMD processor to emulate a 16-bit game? We don't even care if you download them on PSP too. As long as you're playing Nintendo games on PSP, Sony can't make profits off of software sales. Matter of fact, that's probably why Xbox failed so miserably. Tee hee. SuCk On ThAt!"

But I, being the obsessive compulsive that I am, will feed into Nintendo's greed for a chance to beat you haters in Tetris Attack on Nintendo Wi-Fi.

EDIT: And you make a good point, Assertn, because they're going to have to go in and update the games to support Nintendo Wi-Fi, anyway. Forget updating graphics for now; think about the effort it'll take just to add in networking functionality.

[Tekkaman Vigorot]

They did have screen shot on IGN showing a Super Mario Bros remake, with updated graphics and junk like that. No prices have been finalized yet but I'm sure they wouldn't really charge you THAT much considering it's a download. Also, for games not their own, it depends on what the developers want the games to sell for, so if Megaman for some reason costs $1 more than all the other NES games, you go to Capcom, not Nintendo. XD

Oh yes, the final design of the Rev is going to be EVEN smaller! XD.

[Assertn]

I bet they are going to make as few alterations to the old games as possible. Because....

1) Look how long it takes to release a remake of an older game for gba. 1 mario game every what, 6 months? I haven't really been following, but don't they plan to have most of their NES, SNES, and N64 games available for revolution? It would be physically impossible to remake all of them before an even newer gen of consoles without considerably expanding their workforce.

2) NES files sizes are in mere KB, while SNES I believe are closer to the MB area. If they plan to transfer these things over the internet, then they want to keep them as compact as possible. The concept of wireless transferring N64 episodes unchanged already amazes me, let alone any further visual upgrades to all these games.

3) How big is the Revolution hard drive, anyway?

[Ryllharu]

I was asking my roommate about it, and the Revolution aparently has an SD card slot, more than enough to keep a tremendous amout of the old titles on it, and plenty of room for some 64 titles as well.

The three largest SNES titles are Tales of Phantasia at 6 megs, Seiken Densetsu 3 at 4 megs, and Chrono Trigger at 4 megs. There are other titles at 4 megs, but not too many. N64 titles are on average about 32 megs a piece. That's due simply to limits that a cartridge could hold those days. That probably led to the 64's downfall, since the cds on the other systems allowed for FMV's and other massive storage.

They won't bother upgrading the games, at least not at first. It's a lot more impressive a selling point to have the entire library available at launch. Even if they're only a couple of dollars each, buying 15-25 games for the same price as a new one is a very nice thing to have at launch. It worked with Steam and Half Life 2. I bought a Silver package and got 8 games for a single high priced PC game.

[milfhunter]

Originally posted by: AssertnFailure
Look how long it takes to release a remake of an older game for gba. 1 mario game every what, 6 months?

That could've been more of a business strategy than an issue of technical limitations. They probably wanted to give each release a long enough time period to maximize sales. If games like Beyond Good and Evil were to come out now for the Xbox 360 launch or something, I guarantee that game would be a bestseller. It's all about timing.

Originally posted by: Ryllharu
They won't bother upgrading the games, at least not at first. It's a lot more impressive a selling point to have the entire library available at launch.

It's definitely impressive from a technical perspective (or in a numbers game) but if Nintendo really wants to compete against Xbox Live Arcade (and Nintendo has to if they're serious about attracting third-party support specifically from independent game developers), then retrofitting classic titles to support networking is a necessity.