Revolution Graphics Will Be Equal To Competitors

[Master Shake]

I really hope these guys do well with this...

I've read that the revolution is supposed to be a lot easier to program for because it uses more common hardware. It doesn't look to be underpowered by any means, but the better the code is written the better the graphics will probably be. I think the first 360 (anderson cooper anyone?) games are supposed to be only single-threaded. These guys know what they're up against, I seriously doubt their going to screw with around with something that could potentially break them.

[Jeremy1]

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

586752108[/snapback]

That's not what the Nintendo guy said.

[Master Shake]

I haven't played a gamecube, are the graphics as good as a ps2/xbox?

For the revolution to do really well they're going to have to make it as user friendly and have the image/advertising similar to an iPod. The downloadable games thing is really attracting people. I like the idea of being able to download all of my old favorites.

Remember how you use to turn your controller in the old days when you were playing? I wonder if they will add that to the older games so you could use the new controller with them.

[Aaryn]

That's not what the Nintendo guy said.

586752114[/snapback]

Yeah I think what he meant is to the average game player there won't be a difference. The techies among us will notice the extra features the xbox can do but those who care mostly about gameplay wont notice/care.

It won't be able to do everything the xbox can do with graphics, of course, but the games will be there hopefully

[Ayepecks]

For some reason, I'm going to say that even if the graphics ARE worse, no one will be able to tell much of a difference -- similar to the XBox and GameCube. There's a slight difference, but not much.

Secondly, I'm still trying to get how all the 360 fanboys are saying it's "impossible"... how is it impossible? To fit in a space that small? Yeah, just like a 3D handheld was impossible, but we've got the PSP and DS.

[JustGeorge]

I don't really give a shiny **** at this point. Its time for Game companies to put up or shut up! Yes, that was directed mainly at Mr. Ken K.

[GoogleNinja]

:laugh: Okay, maybe I'm not the only guy with the kahunas to say "Screw graphics."

[IGx89]

If the Revolution can't output HD resolutions, it obviously can't have as good of graphics as the other two consoles (unless "competition" means PS2/Xbox 1). That's undeniable.

[Master Shake]

I don't really care about graphics all that much as long as they're on par with most other things... You can only carry a game so far on graphics. I want something to make me feel like my nintendos or genesis did. I have a ps2 and never play it... I probably play my old nintendo more than I play my ps2.

[notuptome2004]

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.

586751540[/snapback]

Well the gamecube doesant have Pixle shaders and is based on Directx 7 technolagies Xbox has PS1.4 based shaders the GC how ever had better graphcis abilities then that of PS2 since PS2 was based on DX6/ some 7 from things i have read in the past about its hardware.

from what i have alredy read is that the NR system will use a standard X800 based chip cheaper for cost i guess and the X360 uses ATI yes but uses i woudl say more in the line of PS4.0 + technolagies as been siad to be 2 maby 3 years more advanced so DX10+ based features. PS3 uses a modifade 7800 nvidia card witch is current technolagy witch is abit ahead of the X800 series ATI card technolagy

[Alpha2004]

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

586751811[/snapback]

give em a break...he obviously has trouble lifting his own pocket change :p

[Leddy]

The problem for nintendo systems, for me, is that the games (or rather, the selection of games) were always not as good as the ones on the PSX/2, or the Xbox.

Nintendo seems to target a younger audience than Sony or Microsoft does.

[x-byte]

If the Revolution can't output HD resolutions, it obviously can't have as good of graphics as the other two consoles (unless "competition" means PS2/Xbox 1). That's undeniable.

586752197[/snapback]

HD and graphics are two different things.... And yes the image will be crispier, but the graphics will still be the same.

from what  i have alredy read is that the  NR system will use a standard  X800 based chip cheaper  for cost i guess  and  the X360 uses ATI yes  but  uses  i woudl say  more in the line of PS4.0 + technolagies    as been siad to be 2 maby 3  years more advanced so DX10+ based features.  PS3 uses  a  modifade  7800 nvidia card  witch is current technolagy witch is abit ahead of the X800 series ATI card technolagy

586752218[/snapback]

No one knows about the hardware of Revolution yet...

[iconboy]

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.

586752118[/snapback]

Im sorry, but i think you have it completly backwards,. Sony and M$ are going after the most mainstream casual gamers out there and Nintendo has always touted themselves as"games first" insinuating that they are after the hardcore market, and honestly do u see a small kid buying their next console? i think everyone who grew up with mario will buy one out of loyalty to the big N and how many people now a days own a Gamesube AND either a PS2 or an Xbox?

[x-byte]

The problem for nintendo systems, for me, is that the games (or rather, the selection of games) were always not as good as the ones on the PSX/2, or the Xbox.

Nintendo seems to target a younger audience than Sony or Microsoft does.

586752233[/snapback]

Nintendo appeal to me more than other systems though... ;) Yes they seem to do that don't they?

Im sorry, but i think you have it completly backwards,. Sony and M$ are going after the most mainstream casual gamers out there and Nintendo has always touted themselves as"games first" insinuating that they are after the hardcore market, and honestly do u see a small kid buying their next console? i think everyone who grew up with mario will buy one out of loyalty to the big N and how many people now a days own a Gamesube AND either a PS2 or an Xbox?

586752272[/snapback]

Yes. Thanks for correcting me about the casual gamers. I think I'm a bit sleepy here.. MS and Sony are targeting the more casual gamers because of the graphics. Nintendo is trying to appeal to the none gamers and "the family". They are hoping to get everyone to play games. While the compettion wan't the ones that play games to play more.... in a way.

Of course the Nintendo fans will get a Revolution, just as the most of the others will get a 360 and a PS3 like they did with PS2 and Xbox.

[udontneed2know]

Theres nothing hardcore about Nintendo's market. They are simply going after the new kids on the blocks and the Nintendo fanatics.

They've been going after the same market for decades, so dunno how someone can think it'll change.

This news doesn't suprise me though. Both ATI and IBM are working on the internals for the system so hell ATI could simply do a copy and paste with some changes ( for the new CPU ) and be done with it. IBM will most likely make a CPU alot like the Xenon. Cell is completely patented so IBM has to stay far away from anything that closely resembles that architecture, and they wouldn't do that anyway since Cell will be making them a stack of cash also.

[lostspyder]

As far as graphics goes, the gamecube cant turn out the same level of graphics either the PS2 or the xbox can, but theyve gotten amasingly good at working around that. There games look awsome, and always have. Also nintendo brand games usualy have 10x the gameplay of half the titles released for one of the other two.

If I spend the money on any system it will be without a doubt a revelution. Ive owned every nintendo console since the original NES and have been 100% satfied with them :D

[Ryne]

As far as graphics goes, the gamecube cant turn out the same level of graphics either the PS2 or the xbox can, but theyve gotten amasingly good at working around that. There games look awsome, and always have.  Also nintendo brand games usualy have 10x the gameplay of half the titles released for one of the other two.

If I spend the money on any system it will be without a doubt a revelution. Ive owned every nintendo console since the original NES and have been 100% satfied with them :D

586752412[/snapback]

Huh? I thought the GC was the second strongest console this time around.

[Erich]

As far as targetting people... "every person is a dollar sign"... All companies are targetting everyone. They just have different ways of going about it, and have different thoughts on who potential buyers are.

IMO Nintendo with a '1 graphic card generation' delay over the xbox, will probably be able to outperform it. But with the raw money invested in PS3, it will probably be the graphical ###### this generation - But Nintendo will be in second place, and everyone will then backtrack to the good ol' "Nintendo makes kiddy games" argument. Sound familiar?

As well, you guys also forget, Nintendo knows how to make game systems. The only other company that had some knowledge in making game systems was Sega, andd they're out. Sony and MS are not game companies, their solution is throw more money at it. Nintendo's solution is fine tune everything. It get's them better performance for less. And for facks sakes. When you see tens thousands of blades of grass swaying the wind, thousands of leaves blowing side to side, and lifelike enemies swinging a sword at you in the revolution's Zelda game, are you really going to care how PS3 could make that scene slightly crisper??? I won't have the time to notice cuz I'll be having fun, while you guys stare at the picture.

[Epimetheus]

Actually it's the strongest, compare Metroid and Halo together and you'll see that the Xbox doesn't have a whole lot more going for it in terms of graphics.

[Eaten By A Grue]

For the love of God people, stop arguing and use common sense.

Like someone said in the stickied Revolution thread earlier today:

- Probably the graphics of the Revolution\Xbox360\Playstation 3 on standard televisions running at 480i/p will look identically the same. This will affect 87.5 percent of population according to IGN in June (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/624/624517p1.html) who own standard televisions. I swear Iwata or Miayamoto said specifically the differences on standard televisions without HD capabilities will not be noticable, or something along those lines. Chances are the Revolution has enough power to keep up with the Xbox360 and PS3 at that resolution.

- However the Revolution will not be able to perform the same as the Xbox360\PS3 on HD television sets with resolutions 720p or 1080i/p. It will not have the power to output at that resolution considering the size of the console, how much people speculate they are going to sell it for, and the speculation about the processor\graphics chips themselves, it just doesn't seem possible. This will only affect the 12.5% of people who do own HDTVs who plan on getting the Revolution or future HD TV purchasers.

Nintendo was modest in the past with the capabilities of the GameCube and it turned out being slightly less powerful then the Xbox and it cost them less to make it. It would not shock me if they pulled a similar stunt with the upcoming generation when all three consoles are played on standard televisions. However, HD televisions using hi-def is what will separate the Revolution from the other two.

Edited November 1, 2005 by Ridley Norfair

[Mystical112]

As far as targetting people... "every person is a dollar sign"... All companies are targetting everyone. They just have different ways of going about it, and have different thoughts on who potential buyers are.

IMO Nintendo with a '1 graphic card generation' delay over the xbox, will probably be able to outperform it. But with the raw money invested in PS3, it will probably be the graphical ###### this generation - But Nintendo will be in second place, and everyone will then backtrack to the good ol' "Nintendo makes kiddy games" argument. Sound familiar?

As well, you guys also forget, Nintendo knows how to make game systems. The only other company that had some knowledge in making game systems was Sega, andd they're out. Sony and MS are not game companies, their solution is throw more money at it. Nintendo's solution is fine tune everything. It get's them better performance for less. And for facks sakes. When you see tens thousands of blades of grass swaying the wind, thousands of leaves blowing side to side, and lifelike enemies swinging a sword at you in the revolution's Zelda game, are you really going to care how PS3 could make that scene slightly crisper??? I won't have the time to notice cuz I'll be having fun, while you guys stare at the picture.

586752494[/snapback]

i agree with u... i wish nintendo would really show something tho... its driving me nuts...

[RichieNine9]

I have always been a Nintendo follower and probably always will be and am way more interested in the Rev for its gameplay than graphics but i gotta say i am a little turned off by it for it not having HD capabilities. I know they play to a younger crowd but come on.

[Dark_INk]

Ditto, but ...

... 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.

586752013[/snapback]

Don't forget Rare's Starfox Adventures- most visually impressive gc game imo :happy:

but then, those games do relly heavily on graphics.

compare platformers on ps2 to gc (jak, sly, etc.), graphically the gc outperforms, hell, metroid looks better than killzone.

I would support the belief that graphical power played a key role in the gc's platformer success.

(which does mean they will be missing a leg in the next gen.)

[Salohcine]

We all know Nintendo will have created yet another beast of a console, I reckon it will be like the N64, lots of new innovations that everyone will want to copy, the best graphics and have some of the best gamesout. I am not a fanboy I'm buying a 360 when they come out and are in stock, a PS3 when they come down from needed a loan to afford one and the revolution when its out.

I still think graphics are needed to be good on certain games where realism enhances the experience btu they arnt that important what we have now at the end of this generation is good enough and if nintendo manage to pull off this awsome idea of the controller then I think they are on a winner if their graphics will be as good as the 360 and PS3, it will win people over.