Revolution Graphics Will Be Equal To Competitors

[GNRambo]

Much of the rumours and speculation around the Nintendo Revolution have been aimed at its graphics capabilities. Many have said that Nintendo?s next-gen console will not compete with the impressive power of the Playstation 3 and the Xbox 360

A Spanish website called MeriStation conducted an interview with Nintendo big wig, Jim Merrick recently, in which he quickly put to rest some of the misinformation surrounding Nintendo?s place amongst Microsoft and Sony.. In the interview, Jim addressed one question that has been in the back of the minds of many a Nintendo fans - How good will the Nintendo Graphics be? Jim explained a ?difference will not exist? between the Nintendo Revolution and the competition.

The statement is reassuring in light of the many game screens shots and video clips for both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 already available online.

Of course, until Nintendo and game publishers release their own screen shots and video clips we are still unable to form our own opinions.

With the Xbox 360scheduled for release on November 22nd Nintendo has a great deal of ground to make up in order to win over the anxious game fans who will have already had a taste of the next generation gaming

Source: JoyStiq

[Jeremy1]

I don't see how that's possible.

[RichieNine9]

doubtful but hopeful

[shao]

nintendo has always approached marketing differently. famously stating the capabilities of the gamecube in terms of fully effected/textured pixels or polygons, as opposed to sony and microsoft stating their capabilities with unaffected/untextured pixels or polys. the numbers came out lower. but then when you look at what the gamecube is capable of compared to the ps2, are they really that different? ps2 might push more polys, but it doesn't have shaders.

nintendo also likes to take the intelligent, and considered approach to hardware design, again look at the size of the gamecube compared to the original ps2 and xbox. astounding really.

on past form it's not hard to imagine revolution's capabilities being around the same sort of levels as it's competitors. especially in terms of the kind of graphical effects that can be pushed out by the console - if not in terms of raw number crunching power. but then nintendo have always been about the games, not the technology.

[GoogleNinja]

Screw graphics. I'd get a Revolution for the new controller. The only game could be Super Mario 64 and I'd still get a Revolution.

I'm probably the only one here with the kahunas to say "Screw graphics.", but... that's how I feel.

[Gfunk4life]

i think the difference will be almost as good as the others 2 but not better or the same(i think Graphics will not be bad but not as good)

_____________________________

how do people get the things at the bottom like RichieNine9?(family guy fan)

[zi0nx5]

Though I'd like this to happen, I doubt it will; that is, unless the time gap between 360 launch and Revolution launch is enough for Nintendo to make up for the "subordinate" tech specs---compared to 360, specifically. There's no way Revolution will come close to PS3 tech specs since they'll likely be launched around the same timeframe so Sony and Big N will have the same pool of technology to fill their consoles with. (Iwata recently confirmed that Revolution won't launch before the end of March/end Nintendo's fiscal year, check cube.ign.com, so that'll give Nintendo at least four months to regroup).

Merrick may have also chosen his words carefully, as Nintendo reps always do. His response was to a question about "graphics" and not tech specs, so Nintendo may bust out with another attempt at using lackluster tech to produce graphics that are on-par with the competitors' (as they did with Gamecube... yes XBOX graphics are naturally more impressive but sometimes there is little difference esp. for cross-platform games. Remember how RE4 came out which defied everyone's expectations as far as Gamecube's graphical potential).

[black.ops]

Screw graphics.  I'd get a Revolution for the new controller.  The only game could be Super Mario 64 and I'd still get a Revolution.

I'm probably the only one here with the kahunas to say "Screw graphics.", but...  that's how I feel.

586751556[/snapback]

Screw graphics.

Graphics are good enough for me currently.

Oh and GoogleNinja = post 666.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Oh yeah, give me a gimmicky controller over actual power anyday :rolleyes:

[seta-san]

that's a really ignorant statement. Until we find out how the new control performs under real world conditions i'd be happy if you kept your trap shut. For all we know nintendo has set yet another industry standard, such as the D-pad, analog joystick, shoulder buttons, dance pads, and rumble feature.

Oh yeah, give me a gimmicky controller over actual power anyday  :rolleyes:

586751563[/snapback]

[Ryan V]

Oh yeah, give me a gimmicky controller over actual power anyday  :rolleyes:

586751563[/snapback]

Give me innovation and gameplay over grahpics. :)

[firebud]

This isn't impossible

I can't tell the difference between the Game Cube and the XBrick's graphics.

And it's like a 30 pound difference.

[christracy]

i rather great gameplay over graphics anyday. nothing worse than great graphics in a game you don't want to play. it doesnt have to be bleeding edge graphics if you ask me. if i'm compelled or engrossed in the game the graphics need only to support that. if i wanted pretty pictures i'd go to a museum and not buy any console.

and rap4life, not sure how he got that sig but its way to big for neowin. he needs to cut that down a bit.

[Ryan V]

Well somehow I believe this is possible - High Def does take quite a bit more power both from the GPU & CPU, thus we may see a performance hit and lower frame rates since HD requires more power. However, since Revolution isn't outputting in HD it should have more power to available for graphics and thus allowing it to a have a higher frame rate. Also on IGN, some developers were saying the same thing.

[b mitchell]

Yeah, considering the Xbox only weighs a little over 8 pounds :whistle:

586751811[/snapback]

dude, joke, take one sometime.....

[Stokkolm]

This isn't impossible

I can't tell the difference between the Game Cube and the XBrick's graphics.

And it's like a 30 pound difference.

586751784[/snapback]

Yeah, considering the Xbox only weighs a little over 8 pounds :whistle:

[mayamaniac]

hehe.. you know if the Revolution's graphics are any where near the X360's, Nintendo would've over hype it as better than the competitions, just as how Sony is hyping the PS3. They wouldn't say it is equal to the competition. This means that the Revolution's graphics is not as good as the X360's.

[esco]

having the x360 and ps3 for amazing graphics is enough for me. As long as the revolution has an innovative control scheme, i'll be happy.

[nav1]

doubtful but hopeful

586751508[/snapback]

Ditto, but ...

Screw graphics.  I'd get a Revolution for the new controller.  The only game could be Super Mario 64 and I'd still get a Revolution.

I'm probably the only one here with the kahunas to say "Screw graphics.", but...  that's how I feel.

586751556[/snapback]

... Screw graphics indeed. In my opinion, the current state of GCN is enough for me. I mean, what more detail could you want out of Mario Sunshine (beautiful water and sunsets!), Metroid Prime, and even Zelda (both TP and WW). Perhaps maybe a few better textures and stuff, but it would maybe require 2 or 3 times the current power, which is pretty much what they are saying it will be.

[x-byte]

I doubt it will be equal. But if Revolution can produce graphics close to the competition and deliver a whole new gamingexperience..., they can in fact do very strong.

What do 360 and PS3 deliver for the next-gen other than improved graphics? Very little actually. And they also target a more spesific group than Nintendo does. This could give Nintendo the edge over its competition.

But it's to early to say since none of the systems is out yet and the gap between the 360 and Revolution/PS3 is rather wide... I don't see the PS3 doing strongly since it's simular to the 360 in terms of graphics. And of the buyers realise that, I think they will go for a 360 and a Revolution instead of waiting for the PS3.

Edited November 1, 2005 by [X]-bYtE

[Xtreme $niper]

Not that its impossible, but just as others are saying... The revolution is more about the gameplay rather than graphics.

And for those who are saying its not possible, I don't see why not. It may not be as powerful in terms of processor speed (as far as we know at this moment) but the graphics card is pretty high end.

[Jeremy1]

they also target a more spesific group than Nintendo does.

586751997[/snapback]

How do you figure?

[jerry]

I think most people are dimissive of Revolution's power because of its form factor (size). :D

[dagamer34]

The graphics on the Revolution don't have to look exactly like those on the PS3 and Xbox 360, just slightly comparable.

[x-byte]

How do you figure?

586752066[/snapback]

Wel. Sony and MS are targeting hardcore and core gamers. You can simple figure that out by looking on what they are marketing the consoles for, graphics. While Nintendo appeal to more non-gamers, core gamers and casual gamers than its competition (next-gen).

Nintendo is trying to expand their marked by appealing to other than its core and hardcore -gamers. While both Sony and MS is looking more in the direction of their previous gamers that bought their last consoles.