The GHZ Forum

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673578p1.html

Well, a few anyway. Rather unsurprisingly to me, it turns out the 2-3 times more powerful than Gamecube comments from a while back are apparently pretty close to the truth. 128 megs of ram or less apparently, a quarter of the 360's. Developer comments calling it more like a "souped up Xbox" than a next gen console. No word on the CPU yet, but I expect the machine will be fairly balanced as a whole.

If this is all accurate, I guess they made a good choice hiding the specs for so long, because it really IS going to have to be all about the controller. Personally I knew from the second I saw what they were trying to do with the remote though, that if they could pull it off I'd buy the system, regardless of specs, so not much has really changed for me.

All I really want now is to actually see some fucking game footage. Prove to me you can make this ridiculous idea (and insanely dangerous business decision) actually work, Nintendo.

2-3 times the GameCube isn't all that bad anyways. Just look at RE4.

Either way the graphics went everybody knew it was all about the controller and how well it gets used.

There goes the 3rd parties who want to go cross-platform for certain games for the system. =P

I don't think more than a few games actually utilize those insane system specs.

Just wait a year or two when developers start utilizing multicore threading.

Nintendo has consistently downplayed the role of horsepower with Revolution, often saying that graphics have reached a "saturation point" in today's games. Nintendo bigwig Shigeru Miyamoto has suggested that players might not be able to tell the difference between the new Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and some high-definition games.

I think he's right, and doesn't that trippy controller also plug into a regular looking GC controller for third party multiplatform games or did I miss something?

Revolution is the only console that has me (cautiously) excited, and that's entirely because of the controller. Xbox 360 and PS3 seem to be more of the same - "like PS2/GC/Xbox but a bit better". And it's not like PS2/GC/Xbox were much fancier than 1998's Dreamcast.

As much as I'm looking forward to the Revolution, it was just stupid of them to make the system non-HD.

Yeah, its not like it won't work on regular TV's, but they would need more RAM. RAM is cheap, but not that cheap.

Watch, Nintendo will still make money with the thing.

And what are Sony and Microsoft doing with there respective consoles, hmm? Not making money, I bet.

WhoopA wrote:Watch, Nintendo will still make money with the thing.

And what are Sony and Microsoft doing with there respective consoles, hmm? Not making money, I bet.

lol internets

WhoopA wrote:And what are Sony and Microsoft doing with there respective consoles, hmm? Not making money, I bet.

...

Oh, yeah, sure, okay. You're not a moron.

I thought he was referring to the fact that Microsoft loses money ($126 or so) on each 360 they put out, and that Sony is projected to face similar losses with the PS3.

This is also why I don't "get" sports, in particular having "your team."

Kishi wrote:I thought he was referring to the fact that Microsoft loses money ($126 or so) on each 360 they put out, and that Sony is projected to face similar losses with the PS3.

However, you have to take in to account the ridiculous mark-up that's applied to games and accessories.

You generally don't make money off of the item itself, but rather from the things that you sell to make it harder/better/faster/stronger/do what it was built to do.

Yeah I thought people realized this by now. Every company loses money on hardware and makes profits from software royalities.

Or, if you're Microsoft... you just lose money, period. Barrels and barrels of money. But it's not like they can't afford it or anything!

Or, if you're Esrever, you draw an awesome comic and WHAT HAPPENS I GOTTA KNOW SAM WAS ALL LIKE "You missed a spot" AND THEN I HAD TO GO TO WORK NOT FAIR MAN NOT FAIR

Damn right. My hooks have rarely been so tentered.

Anyway, yeah. Purdy games are nice an' all, but I'm really looking forward to waving that controller around like a sword or whatever. System specs never mean that much to me anyhow.

Kishi wrote:I thought he was referring to the fact that Microsoft loses money ($126 or so) on each 360 they put out, and that Sony is projected to face similar losses with the PS3.

If that's the case, then why wouldn't Nintendo lose money on the Revolution in the same way?

Also, what about that download feature? Won't that get them a lot of support from classic gamers?

Segaholic2 wrote:Just wait a year or two when developers start utilizing multicore threading.

I've been using multicore threading for a while now. It's not that great.

If anyone's interested, a few further details have been revealed in another update, though overall it all equates to the same thing...or more accurately, that 1 and a half to 2 times more powerful is a more accurate assessment.

http://revolution.ign.com/articles/673/673799p1.html

I was really trying not to care about specs before, because I know with the controller it really <i>shouldn't</i> matter, but this is a little bit lower than even my low expectations were. I was hoping it might be powerful enough for low resolution multiplatform games to be possible, but there's not a chance of that now.

In all honesty, how many of us have high definition televisions anyways? All those fancy specs and high definition graphics don't do much on your standard television... and I know I sure as heck don't plan on putting down the cash for a 40" plasma screen until the price becomes a little more reasonable.

Fuck Plasma, LCD mang! But yeah, they are expensive as shit, I've been looking into it lately.

Every developer was in agreement that Revolution should launch with a price tag of $149 or lower. Some speculated that based on the tech, a $99 price point would not be out of the question.

Well that is certainly nice.

In that case, guess which of the new consoles will be my first?