• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Update on the Revolution HD stuff (Nintendo's response)

Ruzbeh

Banned
rusty said:
First no HD, now no ethernet? This is like a bad joke.
No, it's the other way around. First no ethernet port, and now no HDTV support.
midnightguy said:
the only way Nintendo can make up for the lack of HDTV resolutions, is if every 1st, 2nd and 3rd party Revolution game is locked at 60fps and provides 8x FSAA. any thing less than every game being 60fps will be a complete fuckup on Nintendo's part.

next generation Revolution? only 480p ? thats fine, but make sure every game is 60fps standard, just like every game is going to run at a certain resolution. or else, why bother?
What is up with 60fps? :lol I'm used to playing PC games at 15-25 fps! Just anything above 20 fps and I'm happy.

By the way... click. Nintendo forums moderator says "Anything can change".
 

Amir0x

Banned
Ruzbeh said:
What is up with 60fps? :lol I'm used to playing PC games at 15-25 fps! Just anything above 20 fps and I'm happy.

Uhhhhh. Well, we're all very glad you'd settle for much less, completely inferior framerates that actually affect the gameplay experience, but we'll take our minimum of 30fps and wish for 60fps as standard thanks.

Seriously.

Ruzbeh said:
By the way... click. Nintendo forums moderator says "Anything can change".

Oh My God, people have got to stop posting these hilarious links to Nintendo forums. I can't stop laughing when I read some of the posts.

I would like to say that this is the Nintendo Revolution were talking about! It is supposed to have a feature that no gaming system has ever had, and will revolutionize the gaming world! What if it was somthing so cool, that it didn't even hook up to a T.V.... it like... projected the image directly into your mind, or it used holograms to show gameplay, or you have a visor with a basic screen inside of it and with some kind of glove that lets you feel objects in the game, or somthing even cooler that once everyone knows what it is, no one will care about HD. Really, even if it was somthing just with the controller that was really cool, no one would care about HD. Just think about it, and stop making it such a big deal.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA.
 

Ponn

Banned
See, you people are looking at it wrong. No HD support, no ethernet jack, these are features people!! That is the revolution, they aren't conforming to what people want. Kuturagi started it with the PSP and the sticking button as a feature and now Iwata is trying to get in on it, thats all. Geez....
 
I could care less about HD, first it was MS who said ONLY HD, now its Nintendo who says they wont support it............pple are never satisfied, meanwhile i will still be playing those games on my tiny TV........i swear, the American pple are never, never satisfied.......its always mine is bigger than yours type of attitude...........
 

Amir0x

Banned
Bluemercury said:
I could care less about HD, first it was MS who said ONLY HD, now its Nintendo who says they wont support it............pple are never satisfied, meanwhile i will still be playing those games on my tiny TV........i swear, the American pple are never, never satisfied.......its always mine is bigger than yours type of attitude...........

What the flipping fuck? What does this have to do with being an American?

THIS CALLS FOR ANOTHER NINTENDO FORUM POST!

M-PG71C said:
During E3 2005, Nintendo focused on an aspect that they felt needed to be addressed to every game company and every gamer out there. Reggie himself claimed that Nintendo is a "and" company and not a "either/or" company. They cater to everyone regardless if your a core gamer, a casual gamer, and they will even try to cater to the non-gamers.

Despite the comment above, gamers everywhere started to question Reggie's integrity when Perrin Kaplan of NOA was quoted saying "It is accurate that at this time we will not support high-definition [on Revolution]." Apparently, after hearing of this quote, it is obvious and crystal clear that Nintendo is a "either/or" company and supporting gamers of all types is nothing more then a marketing gimmick being employed by them.

Now, some will say that I'm being too quick to judge and that this can be changed without notice. Let me clarify that I don't care. What I do care about, however, is that this is their current motive as of right now and that supporting HDTV gamers is not part of that motive. That is a problem, regardless, including for a machine that claims to be a "Revolution" for gaming. You can't be "Revolutionary" if your motives are still archaic. You can't be part of a "Revolution" if you don't embrace the current, innovative, ideas of present day technology. Period.

What really makes this sadistic is that Nintendo is a hardware manufacturer, and yet they don't embrace these new ideas that can take gaming to a whole new level of clarity and picture quality. Which has been something that has been constantly improving every generation. Factor Five's (Creator of the Rogue Squadron Series) Eggebrecht was quoted saying, "It's a little bit sad that as a hardware manufacturer you wouldn't be embracing that (HD) because quite frankly it's exciting."

You have to really wonder, is Nintendo already alienating consumers before they even thought about purchasing their next home console? The Revolution is designed to look like a high-end electronics component, but it lacks a major element of other next-generation systems, which is high-definition support. For whatever reasons, Nintendo refused to embrace online gaming which resulted them losing customers and third parties alike. It's almost like Nintendo is repeating the same mistake again, except in a different scenario. Will it backfire on them in the long-run? Microsoft seems to think so.

"We're committed to delivering a product that caters to the needs of our consumers. To develop a console devoid of HD capability would be to alienate an important facet of the industry," says Microsoft's Henshaw. "High Definition is gaining momentum extremely quickly and we've developed advanced technologies that ensure that our games look great on standard definition television sets as well as HDTV sets. We're not limiting our audience by delivering to one quadrant of society. We want to ensure that everyone, whether they own an HD or standard definition set, gets the most out of the experience."

Now, some of you are going to say "How does it benefit gaming?" and "Why do both Microsoft and Sony embrace it?". Factor Five's Eggebrecht says, "I'm personally extremely excited for high-definition. I think for this generation it's the biggest step. Visuals will improve in general, but at the same time what we're finally getting is a definitive 16x9 picture, which makes a huge difference. High-definition makes a huge difference, even gameplay wise. You can suddenly see a lot of things, especially in the distance, that you couldn't before. You can see a lot more detail that is lost in the old resolution. It's the most important step for this transition of consoles."

As you can see, high-definition gaming IS part of gaming's future and for Nintendo to ignore it completely is a flawed step towards the wrong direction. We, as Nintendo gamers, need to step up and let Nintendo know that this decision is flawed and they need to reconsider. We need to send E-Mails, we need to write editorials on different forums, we need to educate other gamers on why HD is important. Most importantly, we need to show Nintendo that there is plenty of people who do want HD gaming and they shouldn't be neglected at the end of the day.

This Nintendo-ite makes a compelling point!
 

Ponn

Banned
Bluemercury said:
I could care less about HD, first it was MS who said ONLY HD, now its Nintendo who says they wont support it............pple are never satisfied, meanwhile i will still be playing those games on my tiny TV........i swear, the American pple are never, never satisfied.......its always mine is bigger than yours type of attitude...........


Ok, and screw those that have an HDtv and want to use it, right? It may not be a big deal too you, it will eventually when digital TV is the standard and we can get rid of all this region, NTSC, PAL crap. If you feel it doesn't relate to you thats fine, but really don't put down people that it does relate too. It's people bitching and complaining for you that will probably get things done that you will use in the future.
 

Taker666

Member
rusty said:
First no HD, now no ethernet? This is like a bad joke.

What's the problem with no ethernet port?

It costs less to buy a wireless router to play Nintendo games online than for a years Xbox live subscription.
 

hooo

boooy
Bluemercury said:
i swear, the American pple are never, never satisfied.......its always mine is bigger than yours type of attitude...........

All inclusive statements are the best. I'm sorry that you get the dregs of american entertainment where ever you might be, but please don't take it out on us. If anything this country is a summation of most every perspective.

Nintendo and HD. Whatever. It's clear now that Nintendo isn't going to force devs into 720p 5.1 sound as MS and Sony are, and that's the only thing that's clear as far as I'm concerned. I'll be taking a wait and see approach.

Wait till ... later this year I guess? maybe early next?
 
Taker666 said:
What's the problem with no ethernet port?

It costs less to buy a wireless router to play Nintendo games online than for a years Xbox live subscription.

I don't see what the price of a wireless router has to do with the argument being made here.
 

Ruzbeh

Banned
Amir0x said:
THIS CALLS FOR ANOTHER NINTENDO FORUM POST!


This Nintendo-ite makes a compelling point!
Gawd.
For whatever reasons, Nintendo refused to embrace online gaming which resulted them losing customers and third parties alike.
They lost customers and third parties my ass. Online gaming will never, never become important to gaming in general. Just look at PC games.

Nintendo wanted to go online back in the 80s with the NES. And they actually did go online with the NES in Japan. Apparently some of you think that Nintendo thinks that online is just a fad, it is a fad. It will never be an important part to gaming in general. Online is nice, but the single-player experience is all what it's about.
What really makes this sadistic is that Nintendo is a hardware manufacturer, and yet they don't embrace these new ideas that can take gaming to a whole new level of clarity and picture quality. Which has been something that has been constantly improving every generation. Factor Five's (Creator of the Rogue Squadron Series) Eggebrecht was quoted saying, "It's a little bit sad that as a hardware manufacturer you wouldn't be embracing that (HD) because quite frankly it's exciting."
"Take gaming to a whole new level [...]", eh? It's basically gaming with high-quality graphics and with the picture clarity as computer monitors. How does that contribute to the gaming experience? Oops, it doesn't.
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
rusty said:
I don't see what the price of a wireless router has to do with the argument being made here.
Simple. If you want to get the full benefit of Xbox Online with 360, you need to have a Live account. If you to get the full benefit of Nintendo Online with Revolution, you need to have a wireless router.
 
olubode said:
Simple. If you want to get the full benefit of Xbox Online with 360, you need to have a Live account. If you to get the full benefit of Nintendo Online with Revolution, you need to have a wireless router.

Again: I don't want a wireless router because wired connections will always be superior. Why pay for an inferior connection? It's not like a laptop where you gain the advantage of using it anywhere in your house...what's the advantage for the revolution? How many people actually use a console on more than 1 room in the same house?
 
Ruzbeh said:
They lost customers and third parties my ass.
Can I borrow your copy of Burnout 3 for the GC? I'm curious what changed.
Online gaming will never, never become important to gaming in general. Just look at PC games.
I guess Epic, DICE, Blizzard, etc. should just close up shop, because online gaming apparently doesn't matter!

"Take gaming to a whole new level [...]", eh? It's basically gaming with high-quality graphics and with the picture clarity as computer monitors. How does that contribute to the gaming experience? Oops, it doesn't.
Yeah, when I play Shadows of the Empire on my N64, and I do the Hoth level, I can't help but think just how much fucking more immersive it is on the N64 than when I play Rogue Leader's Hoth level on the GC.

SSX3? Fuck that, I don't need draw distance to simulate the experience of snowboarding! Real gamers know that a thick peasoup fog and blurry textures are the real deal.
 

Amir0x

Banned
Ruzbeh said:
They lost customers and third parties my ass.

Well, I guess Nintendo DOESN'T have the smallest third party support among the three hardware developers. I guess Nintendo didn't effectively cut its userbase in half from last gen, or that it isn't at 18 million and that Sony PS2 isn't at 90million. I guess...

...Oh wait...

Ruzbeh said:
Online gaming will never, never become important to gaming in general. Just look at PC games.

I can't believe we're still discussing this in this day and age. Incredible. People still doubt the strength and importance of online gaming, as if it should always be a secondary consideration. Online gaming is expected to grow from a 3.5 billion dollar industry to a 5 billion dollar industry all by itself now by 2006, with millions upon millions of people playing all around the world. Is this an obscure slice, now?

Market research firm DFC Intelligence predicts global revenues for online games will grow to about $5 billion US next year from an estimated $3.5 billion in 2005.

As the market for online games expands into a multibillion-dollar slice of the overall $10 billion video game industry, the Garriotts say they are uniquely positioned to take advantage of a market they helped pioneer in the 1990s.

I don't know about you, but it seems to me that this makes up a considerable and noteworthy part of the industry, one that not only should take equal importance but should be at the forefront of hardware developers minds when considering features to implement into their systems.

And yes, looking at PC games? Shit, just look at PC MMORPG games alone. Millions upon millions of people play those alone.

The consulting firm Deloitte & Touche reported earlier this year that the installed base of devices capable of playing video games — not even including PCs — will grow from 415 million today to 2.6 billion by the year 2010. Worldwide, an estimated 450 million homes will have broadband access by 2010, and one billion persons will have multimedia mobile phones that will support game downloads. There will be games on consoles and PCs, mobile phones, MP3 players, Personal Digital Assistants, set top boxes, children’s toys and even exercise machines.

Source

Seems to me like that's a HUGE FUCKING MARKET for online games. But I don't know, what do you think? 450 million people with broadband worldwide by 2010... seems to be a significant number that we can target for online games, no?

Ruzbeh said:
Nintendo wanted to go online back in the 80s with the NES. And they actually did go online with the NES in Japan. Apparently some of you think that Nintendo thinks that online is just a fad, it is a fad. It will never be an important part to gaming in general. Online is nice, but the single-player experience is all what it's about.

Please, don't spread your single-minded agenda around. It's nice that you think the single-player experience is what it's all about, and there will be plenty of phenomenal single player games. That doesn't change the fact that online is essential going forward, and nobody should even put any doubt into that.

Ruzbeh said:
"Take gaming to a whole new level [...]", eh? It's basically gaming with high-quality graphics and with the picture clarity as computer monitors. How does that contribute to the gaming experience? Oops, it doesn't.

Yeah. Except, ya know, it does monumentally enhance your gaming experience. But perhaps you're too narrowminded to accept it.
 

SantaC

Member
wireless connections and routers gets more stable for each years that passes. Wireless Internet is clearly the future, I can't see how you can bitch on that.
 

ge-man

Member
Of All Trades said:
Yeah, when I play Shadows of the Empire on my N64, and I do the Hoth level, I can't help but think just how much fucking more immersive it is on the N64 than when I play Rogue Leader's Hoth level on the GC.

SSX3? Fuck that, I don't need draw distance to simulate the experience of snowboarding! Real gamers know that a thick peasoup fog and blurry textures are the real deal.

To be fair, who cares how far you can see in a game if it's a slide show. Anybody who thinks that HD resolution is absolutely free at the moment is mistaken.

That doesn't mean that Nintendo's choice is automatically better, though. This is one case where we need to experince the machine first hand before getting pissy over HD.
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
rusty said:
Again: I don't want a wireless router because wired connections will always be superior. Why pay for an inferior connection? It's not like a laptop where you gain the advantage of using it anywhere in your house...what's the advantage for the revolution? How many people actually use a console on more than 1 room in the same house?
Can you just stick to one arguement? Don't want a wireless router? Fine. But, it still remains that if you want to get online with either console, you still need to purchase either hardware or a subscription service.
 

teiresias

Member
By the second year of the Revolution's lifecycle developer support will be so abysmal along with the untimeliness of the only worthwhile Nintendo-developed releases that the Revolution will amount to nothing but a glorified NES/SNES/N64/NGC emulator, forcing you to re-buy the games for the first three consoles even though you own them already.
 

ge-man

Member
teiresias said:
By the second year of the Revolution's lifecycle developer support will be so abysmal along with the untimeliness of the only worthwhile Nintendo-developed releases that the Revolution will amount to nothing but a glorified NES/SNES/N64/NGC emulator, forcing you to re-buy the games for the first three consoles even though you own them already.

This is a silly exaggeration. If you already own the software, why would you feel forced to buy it for the Revolution? No one is being forced to do anything, and there are competitors that you can buy from instead.
 
olubode said:
Can you just stick to one arguement? Don't want a wireless router? Fine. But, it still remains that if you want to get online with either console, you still need to purchase either hardware or a subscription service.

My argument was always that. It was Taker666 that decided for some reason to compare the cost of a wriless router to the cost of Xbox Live, then you jumped in. It has nothing to do with the fact that the wireless router is cheap; it's that you shouldn't have to buy one in the first place. The majority of broadband users don't have wireless, so it should come with an ethernet port. Nintendo should cater to the lowest common denominator, just like HD with MS and Sony...they may or may not bundle HD cables with their systems, but you can bet your ass they will come with standard composite hookups for the 90% of people that don't have an HDTV.
 
What if Nintendo made Revolution even smaller than it is (like they've said they will), if it's cheap and they even somehow put together a wireless version of this?

52_1_bl.JPG


With better quality than standard RF of course.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
rusty said:
My argument was always that. It was Taker666 that decided for some reason to compare the cost of a wriless router to the cost of Xbox Live, then you jumped in. It has nothing to do with the fact that the wireless router is cheap; it's that you shouldn't have to buy one in the first place. The majority of broadband users don't have wireless, so it should come with an ethernet port. Nintendo should cater to the lowest common denominator, just like HD with MS and Sony...they may or may not bundle HD cables with their systems, but you can bet your ass they will come with standard composite hookups for the 90% of people that don't have an HDTV.


now you want nintendo to cater to the lowest common denominator? well, in that case, all next gen consoles should include 56k modems.
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
rusty said:
it's that you shouldn't have to buy one in the first place.
Dude by your logic your saying that you shouldn't have to pay an annual subscription for Xbox Live in the first place.

Edit: plus that makes this whole arguement about HD mute. Fucking Microsoft, you shouldn't force most of the US to upgrade to HD in the first place.

Every week I swear.
 
quadriplegicjon said:
now you want nintendo to cater to the lowest common denominator? well, in that case, all next gen consoles should include 56k modems.

Nah...because that creates lag that starts to affect others just as much as it affects you. You are not affected by my choice of wired/wireless broadband.

olubode said:
Dude by your logic your saying that you shouldn't have to pay an annual subscription for Xbox Live in the first place.

Jesus tap-dancing christ...you are dense. Can we stop comparing apples to oranges? Live is a SERVICE that MS provides that includes extra content. The wireless router wouldn't even put money into Nintendo's pocket. Can we please stop comparing these 2 very different scenarios? Pretty please?

olubode said:
Edit: plus that makes this whole arguement about HD mute. Fucking Microsoft, you shouldn't force most of the US to upgrade to HD in the first place.

With all the eloquence of a drunk choking on his own puke, you managed to stumble through my point completely oblivious. Did you read my post at all? No one is forced to buy an HDTV, as MS and Sony will pack in compostie cables so eveyone can play right out of the box. Who's forcing you to upgrade to HD? That's right...no one.
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
rusty said:
Jesus tap-dancing christ...you are dense. Can we stop comparing apples to oranges? Live is a SERVICE that MS provides that includes extra content. The wireless router wouldn't even put money into Nintendo's pocket. Can we please stop comparing these 2 very different scenarios? Pretty please?



With all the eloquence of a drunk choking on his own puke, you managed to stumble through my point completely oblivious. Did you read my post at all? No one is forced to buy an HDTV, as MS and Sony will pack in compostie cables so eveyone can play right out of the box. Who's forcing you to upgrade to HD? That's right...no one.

Awesome personal attacks there, rusty. And yet you still don't see the point. The so called apples and oranges that I am comparing acheive the exact same result. That is that both systems will require additional purchases to go online in a regular fashion. Both Nintendo and MS will require you to pay additional money to play against other players. So what if one goes to the manufacturer and one goes to joe_router_company. THE END USER STILL HAS TO PONY UP SOME CASH TO PLAY.

And thanks pointing out in a roundabout way HDTV is exactly the same. Want to get the most out of your system? Get an HDTV. It's still money that the end user has to take out of his pocket. Don't want to pay HD? Don't purcha$e one. Don't want to pay to go online everyday with the 360? Don't purcha$e Live. Don't want to pay to go online with Revolution? Don't purcha$e a wireless router.

In the end, if consumers want to get the most out of the gaming experience, your going to have to pay to play. I just think that this bemoaning of Nintendo requiring a wireless router is silly and immature.

FYI: if it matters to anyone, I have an HDTV and a wireless router.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
rusty said:
Nah...because that creates lag that starts to affect others just as much as it affects you. You are not affected by my choice of wired/wireless broadband.

Jesus tap-dancing christ...you are dense. Can we stop comparing apples to oranges? Live is a SERVICE that MS provides that includes extra content. The wireless router wouldn't even put money into Nintendo's pocket. Can we please stop comparing these 2 very different scenarios? Pretty please?





With all the eloquence of a drunk choking on his own puke, you managed to stumble through my point completely oblivious. Did you read my post at all? No one is forced to buy an HDTV, as MS and Sony will pack in compostie cables so eveyone can play right out of the box. Who's forcing you to upgrade to HD? That's right...no one.

Who's forcing you to buy a wireless router for $30-$50? Who's forcing you to upgrade to broadband in order to play online? Who's forcing you to pay $50 dollars a year to play online? Who's forcing you to buy an HDTV? Who's forcing you to play online? Who's forcing you to buy old games? Who's forcing you to buy any of the three next-gen systems?

That's right...no one.

No one is forcing you to do anything. If you're going to criticize nintendo for requiring you to pay a one-time 30-50 dollar fee to get a wireless router to bring the revolution online (which also will let you turn all your wired networking in your house into wireless networks), then you should criticize Microsoft as well for requiring you to pay 50 dollars every year to be able to play games online whenever you want (the majority of which are done via a peer to peer connection)
 

Monk

Banned
olubode said:
Awesome personal attacks there, rusty. And yet you still don't see the point. The so called apples and oranges that I am comparing acheive the exact same result. That is that both systems will require additional purchases to go online in a regular fashion. Both Nintendo and MS will require you to pay additional money to play against other players. So what if one goes to the manufacturer and one goes to joe_router_company. THE END USER STILL HAS TO PONY UP SOME CASH TO PLAY.

Except one probably requires the use of a credit card. I hope for MS's sake they don't make it mandatory this time.
 

dorio

Banned
This company really wouldn't be stupid enough to leave out an ethernet port, the port in which most people connect to the internet? That can't be right.
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
dorio said:
This company really wouldn't be stupid enough to leave out an ethernet port, the port in which most people connect to the internet? That can't be right.
I do hope not, but its not something that should be mentioned in the same clusterfuck as no HD.
 
dorio said:
This company really wouldn't be stupid enough to leave out an ethernet port, the port in which most people connect to the internet? That can't be right.

If they do, then it's instantly the best decision ever!

This is unbelievable. I haven't seen this much damage control since the PS3 HDD thread.

You're right! Hooray for no ethernet port! Hooray for Nintendo!
 
D

Deleted member 284

Unconfirmed Member
rusty said:
If they do, then it's instantly the best decision ever!

This is unbelievable. I haven't seen this much damage control since the PS3 HDD thread.

You're right! Hooray for no ethernet port! Hooray for Nintendo!

Right, cause clearly thats what everyone in this thread is saying. Everyone is defending this decision. </rolleyes>
 

SantaC

Member
olubode said:
Right, cause clearly thats what everyone in this thread is saying. Everyone is defending this decision. </rolleyes>

Agreed. The jr definitley exaggerates when it comes to wifi and ethernet.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
For me, the built in Wifi is a blessing, actually, as there isn't a phone jack within 15 feet of any of the TVs in the house. o_O
 

dorio

Banned
So will there be a way to hook up the revolution to a wired lan line? Some people prefer this because of the consistency of the connection in terms of transferring data for online play.
 
Top Bottom