Iwata comments on the Nintento Revolution

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/01/14/news_6116439.html

Well, the showdown is set. Iwata said that it will be appearing at this years E3. Unfortunatly, he says very little about the important features *Cough such as online play cough* and talks more about how the DS isn't competing with the PSP. Interesting read, none the less.

 

That's quite a good little read. Sound like N is really going to give us something unique this time (but then again all three companies say that).

I really doubt N will ever do 'Online' gaming. Not in it's current form.

 

"Iwata said the DS and PSP aren't directly competing, because Nintendo is aiming for nongamers and retired gamers with its handheld"

So, Ds is aimed at non-gamers and old people.
WTF!?
(J/K)
:smt043 :smt043 :smt043

 

Which games were online for the GC?

 

...The clue's in the name 'Phantasy Star Online' :smt023

 

That's my point. Very few.

 

I knew there were SOME others though. Maybe Phantasy star online III?....I and II were already on it, too. I thought some other game was Online, though.

 

Mario Kart, Kirby Air Ride and 1080 can all be played online... provided you connect your Gamecube up your computer and get it to run homebrew software ;-)

 

yay vga output

 

i just hope this ''revolution'' won't stop third-party compagnies to look at ninty for a platform. I hope it won't stop portages on it either. i hate ports, but i would hate more that a game is released for the ps3 and xbox2 (or whatever name it have) but not on the revolution.


A revolution is welcome, but don't make too many changes ninty, if not you'll sink (you know how casual players are most of times..).

 

The revolution console will make or break nintendo so if they have any brains left they should make an exact copy of the hardware of both competitors making a mulit platform game instant.

That should get 2nd and 3rd party developer way more interrested and would nintendo to do what they do make great nintendo exclusive games that aren't mainstream.

 

I'm sorry but this is utterly impossible. Apart from the licensing issues it will be impossible to recreate cutting-edge hardware (without running into more legal issues) with current ASICs having millions of highly integrated gates, and not to mention proprietary APIs. Not to mention combining two systems into one, that's never gonna happen.

 

It's actually quite easy as all 3 next gens are using 99% identical hardware all use the same graphics chip and cpu the specs of all 3 are almost identical making multi platform porting very logical and if they'd all use the new programing standard microsoft has been working on that would be even easier.

Leaving only platform exclusive titles reasons to buy the console.

 

I think it was time to make something like that Revolution. The concept which deserves my atention is that referred to the controller.

I've always thought that the present controllers are obsolete for 3D games. Ok, you can control any present game with them, but the classic pads are based in a combination of two planes (2D) which allows to simulate that 3D freedom.

If you realize, this idea can work in games in which the character moves over a plane. For example, let's to think about "Duke Nukem 3D". Maybe you could think it's a real free 3D game, but internally the movement is based on a movement over a plane and (when you get a jetpack) a variation of the high. Other games use just the same system. It could be represented by something like this:



Ok, ok, it's easy to control that kind of games with just one thumb pad. Now, think about a flight simulator. If you realize, even the real air planes are based on that combination of two 2D planes: one take control of the direction, and the other one, of the height. So, in a game you would need at least two thumb pads. It's possible to control an object with floats in the air, but it will be really complicated to get a real and secure control over it, because our brain tends to think about each plane independently and, if you haven't trained, you only will be able to work in one plane at the same time.

For years I've been thinking about a control method which allows a real 3D freedom and don't depends on the combination two 2D planes or, at least, it isn't so obvious:



I think that the only way to get something like that is to use what I call the Natural Human Movement, what means: using gestures by hand or something similar. With a classic controller our brain has to organize the movement in two planes and we suffer this much when we play a game like that. After hours playing maybe we've got used to this method, but I can make sure that in a emergency situation (like that which many airplane pilots pass) your control wouldn't be so clear and you would fail repeatly.

However, we don't realize that problem when we do typical gestures. A simple gesture with one finger would be enough. Imagine the extreme of one finger which moves inside a small "cube" which detect its position. A neutral position could be the center of the cube and then, we could move where we want quickly. Interesting, Right?

I don't know about Revolution and what Nintendo is preparing, but if the concept is based in something like this, I would be really glad, because I thought about this method many many years ago.

Salutes .

 

I'm sorry but 99% seems to be a number pulled out of thin air. The fact that all 3 would use the PowerPC Instruction Set Architecture says nothing, Sony's CELL architecture will be extremely alien compared to normal systems (more like MIMD systems like HyperCube), whereas the Xbox Next appears to use a more conventional multiprocessing approach using "stock" G5's. The Revolution will also use one or more PPCs in a more normal fashion. Also, cache and embedded RAM counts might very well be different, as well as the use of customised support chips (Sony will undoubtedly harness those), and hence, the whole memory map. And that's not even considering the graphics hardware, ATI hardware might be used in Revolution and Xbox Next, PS3 will use (it seems) a customised core developed in conjunction with nVidia.
I could go on for several more pages about architecture difference but I think you get the point... I have too much time on my hands :smt043

 

Imo, if ninty and sony accept the standard of microsoft, the world of gaming industry would suffer. Image this, every games are made by with the same engine and standard, and can be easly ported from the pc to the xbox 2, ps3 and revolution. Which compagnies would want to make their next hit exclusive if they have a big oportunity to easly port it to other platforms? Not allot. there would be more an more multi-platforms games for the 4 systems, and less exclusives. So, if every titles are the same on every systems (with some little execptions) which one would you buy? The most powerfull, that's for sure. Hell, with this platform, Micro$oft aslo want to standarize the controller. you'll be able to pick your [xbox next] controller and plug it directly into your pc, this is their new standard . If all consoles are the same, the price will be one important factor of the succes of an opponent, and we all know microsoft can take allot of depts to low their prices with the amount of cash they have (as demonstrated with the xbox first) , and this could just help to the microsoft project to dominate everything they touch and to standarize everything. An belive me, standarization is bad.


anyway, the revolution will be the final hope of nintendo, imo. They risk allot with their ''revolution'' but at the same time try to refresh this satured gaming world. I just hope they won't be as stupid as the last time and will finally see that they are wrong, they need third-party publishers and online. they need to inovate too, and not stick with always the same worlds and charcaters ( i don't say they should kick the plumber and the Kokiri, but the should concentrate more on their big adventures, not on multiple spin-off of ''place mario and co. here'' . If they don't correct this, the revolution will fail, just like her sister, the virtual boy, who tried to revolutionize ''something'' too.

 

So long as they don't fuck with the formula as much as they tried to with the Virtual Boy, Nintendo might be ok for the next generation at least. They still have very strong first/second party exclusives, often with a retro feel, and that alone increases the likelyhood of my buying their console. Online isn't an issue for me (or for most of the UK at the moment), although that's likely to change in the reasonably near future I suppose. People complain about the Gamecube's lack of online connectivity, but only one of my friends actually uses their console online here, and I've never even heard of anyone using their PS2 online. It's just not a concern yet. I know it's different in the US.

Hardware standardization among the consoles would suck, for sure, but it's unlikely to transpire any more than it did in this current generation. Cell will be completely different to PPC, and Sony's proprietary graphic chips (developed with nvidia or not) are likely to be completely different to the chips used in Nintendo and Microsoft's machines, too. For one thing it's counter intuitive for Microsoft's competitors to make a machine even vaguely compatible with their spec, since Microsoft's hardware is likely to be more powerful at a cut-throat cost. That aside, Microsoft are not likely to be sharing their api with anyone so development procedures will be radically different from platform to platform.

Interesting thing with Microsoft's controllers is, this generation was already standardised: the Xbox uses usb, admittedly with a different shaped plug. I welcome their move to usb/firewire for the next generation, it'll mean I might finally be able to get a decent control pad for my PC - provided they can make a pad for human-sized hands...

Also Microsoft is making the Xbox Next into a proprietary entertainment PC for the front room. It's going to be able to do more or less everything you want it to short of your laundry. I doubt Nintendo will follow this route, if the Gamecube is anything to go by. Maybe this will place them in different markets, I guess that'll largely be decided by the price. I heard something about the next Xbox being integrated with the next DirectX, and possibly cross-compatible. Weird, I would have though Microsoft learned from the wealth of shitty PC conversions that this isn't the route to quality games. The PC does a certain kinds of games well, and consoles do other types of games well. Why try and unify two separate gaming platforms?

 

You know what?

I hope they go totally wacko with Revolution, I want to see what they can do. The funny thing is that Nintendo actually COULD profitably produce a console that ONLY plays their games. They make enough first-party sales to do that. And they sell their consoles at a profit, unlike Microsoft, who loses some (hefty) undisclosed amount for each Xbox sold.

I honestly believe that this'll likely be their last console hardware anyway, so I want to see them go out with a bang.

I imagine that after this they'll go the way of Sega, just a software developer. They make neat herdware, but their real strength is games, so I'm actually ok with this.

 

Sorry, but they have already said once they are out of the console business, that they are out of the video game business. No going Sega for Nintendo.

 

Who would want to see Zelda, Mario, or Metroid with a ps2, or an Xbox sign on the box, anyway? I am kind of sure that they wouldnt leave the Handheld dept. either, unless the DS lost to the PSP. That would suck. I wish the "revolution" has super smash bros. 3, with A link to the past Ganon on it, and Wario, Waluigi, and who else...hmmmm.........