Revolution controller – Analysis, Nintendo comment, images, more

I don't get the comment "the rev won't have the power the 360 and PS3 claim to have". We don't know jack about the Rev's specs, the only thing we got to estimate the rev's graphical capabilities is Nintendo's history where Nintendo always had the best graphical performance.
When we look at the Gamecube theoretical it was even weaker then the PS2 (if you compare gigaflops) but graphicall it could beat the Xbox (no all those plastic playmobile dummies some consider 'realistic' do not count, they're a waste of power, not a good use of power).
Reason: the Gamecube was the most efficient and fastest of three in that sense it had almost no bottlenecks the programmers had to program around it and lose a lot of the system's potential in the process.
Seeing that the PS3 and the 360 CPUcore-setup are huge bottlenecks for programmers Nintendo can make a console thats theoreticall only half the 360's power and still beat the crap out of it graphical. just because they have a minimum of bottlenecks.
And realistic graphics won't cut it this generation, having the best art-style will.

So you can think in 2 ways: we don't know crap about how easy it is for multiplatformports on the rev or you could say, however this is from the mouth of a huge optimist, the Rev can do whatever developers can do on the other 2 and maybe even better and cheaper. Who's not the say they're going to use the Rev as the base-hardware where the other ports are based upon.

We all watched the video, it was the main thing we were watching while waiting for Tiger to put the story together. We've also seen many other videos like it, plus it doesn't take a video to make us think of ways the Rev controller could be used.

Think of it this way, you have been told for months and months that the Rev would completely change the way games are played forever. It will alter the very fabric of the games industry. Nothing will ever be the same again. Now you find out that it's a motion sensing 6DOF air mouse with a few buttons and a plug-in analogue stick.

We are going to get "gorilla arm" sufferers like we had when touch screen PCs were the "future" of desktops. We are going to get RSI sufferers. Games are going to have to be shorter because players are going to have to take a break.

It's a large leap to make. Sure, the potential is there to do what Nintendo claim, but is the will there in the general population of the games development community?

See my post earlier today, it will be expensive to port the "bread and butter" games that many publishers and developers rely on to keep them afloat. There will have to be larger manpower to develop for both Rev and "other" consoles. It's not just a core set of game designers and coders with a small team of hardware specialists any more. It's a full team for the Rev including playtesters.

The alternative is to ignore the "revolution" and just use the GC or "slip on" controllers.

The number of games that require the GC controller or the "slip on" fall-back controller will be the true test of the Rev.

I'm not sure if the Rev will catch on.

The fishing rod, maracas, bongos, camera, dance mat, steering wheel, light gun, joystick, microphone, paddle and GameTrack have all made minimal impact on the standard controller of today. Perhaps it was because they were all add-ons, perhaps not.

I think the Revolution controller offers a new way to make games that has more depth to the control method. I just wonder if the games industry is going to take the offer or not. There is also the problem of wether the games playing public are going to accept the Revolution. And there is the problem of weather the Revolution will expand the games market.

But what do I know? I didn't think the DS would do as well as it has.

I do believe that if sony carry on with there current approch to the games industry then they will end up lagging behind. The psp although selling very well is nothing more than a yuppies toy that can do a whole heap of multimedia goodness and so is vastly overpriced. My DS with play yan adapter(pls bring it to the UK nintendo) can do all the same things and with rumors of a palm os collaberation going on the DS will go even further than the PSP could even imagine. But this is the same situatiuon for the PS3 they are manafacturing the machine with Blu-ray technology and harddrive add-on, the fact is they failed with the white elephant that is the PSX because it was riddled with problems and was too expensive. I belive the same will be true of the PS3 it will sell and at the begining probably keep and break all of sonys targets but sony is losing money on the PS2 and PSP at the momment can they really afford to lose money on the PS3. Sony have already said the machine will be more akin to SNK's neogeo in terms of pricing and for that reason alone i think that as the article says sony should be looking really carefully about its next move. They have an expensive machine that is ages away, they haven't even managed to complete there graphics chip set yet. Microsoft has the added advantage of time they will release there machine way before nintendo and sony so they will have a very good proportion of the early adopters who need the latest and greatest hardware. Also microsoft can afford xbox 360, the machine has been very cleverly built around price effective hardware. The time and effort put into the XDK kits will mean that good looking games will be released with very little effort. But i'm still not sure if in the long run microsoft can really win this race without ripping off a whole heap of ideas from other companies (whats the betting that in 6 months they'll be offering an almost identical controller to nintendos offering). Is it a bad thing that they copy ideas...... I don't think so, by copying ideas it changes the industry and allows for a new direction of games (remember nights on the saturn, the analog stick was perfect and the game.... fantastic, the control mechanism, nintendo). I do belive that given nintendos vast R&D department the controller will be perfect but its a question of whether everyone else will give it a chance.

Oh and joji, usually I have no problems with spongs journalism, but i do belive that when whoever wrote the article gets back to the country the rest of the team will be waiting armed to the teeth to give him a good roughing up! :D

Well, it's based on quotes like the following from Nintendo staff.


Taken from IGN's Revolution FAQ

If Miyamoto-san says it won't have the horsepower of the others, it probably won't.

Pologies for the double reply, I only just re-noticed this.

The base for the development of multi-platform games will be whichever sells more. At the moment, purely due to inertia and name recognition, that's probably going to be the PS3.

THINK OF THE WANKING SIM NINTENDO COULD MAKE WITH THIS DEVICE

Trus you to think of something vulgar, Monkey. You cheeky little monkey.

Have a banana....I mean a PS3 pad. Lol.

On the question of Revolutions power it will not be as powerful obviously as the others purely for what has been said and the small size of the console.
Iwata said in a speech that when you see the graphics of the revolution you will say "wow", so maybe the specs for the machine may not be that bad.
I am not expecting amazing graphics, gameplay and functionality come first.

BLIND ASSUMPTIONS ARE FUN!!!



IGN are sell outs, and that was before they literally sold out.

Now you are being totally silly, Pilot. Assumptions and guesses are all we ever really have to go on for most things in life, not jus in gaming. So go on genius pilot, tell me how the 360 and PS3 versions of a game could have better possible gaming options that the Rev (which can do what the do and more)?

And leave the graphics card on the table, quite soon there'll be no point in playing it (and only hardcore gamers will really tell the difference anyway). Online options perhaps could possibly be better, but that's about it really.

Go on then, tell me how I'm wrong?

Sorry if old: Revolution video in slightly better quality:

Click here - Grabbed at conference.

Agree, soon the graphics issue will be moot, since all consoles will be offer photorealistic HD images. But Revolution WON'T... In fact, that is its major flaw - while the others have taken the graphical element a step further than the current generation, Revolution hasn't - it seems to be a current generation console with an innovative, promising, but as yet unproven control method,

So I'd say... for now the graphics card is definitely playable.

On what in-game Revolution footage are you basing this on?

On which technical specification sheet are you basing this on?


Of course, though as Iwata says, playing the graphics game you have to apply the rule of diminishing returns.

And who says the Revolution won't have ancredible graphics? I can't remember a Nintendo home system that failed in this dept...

Weren't Nintendo's first performance indications about 4xGamecube?

[4xResiEvil4 style graphics] + [crazy wand controller] = [fine by me]

None, just the quotes from Nintendo stating "No HD" and "less horsepower than some others".


See above.


Compared to PS3 and X360, Nintendo do. Compared to today's machines, of course, Rev will have better graphics.