Next-gen console assessment.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Elledan said:
Developers were told that they could use the GC SDKs to already begin development of Revolution games. There were many more quotes from Nintendo people and various hints in the past months/year which all point at the Revolution being single-core, which would make sense, considering that Nintendo isn't the kind of company to dive into new technologies until it's been explored by others, such as with online capabilities (virtually non-existent in the GC) and now multi-core, HD and others which aren't really required yet to create good (looking) games.
Click to expand...


Following this logic, Nintendo lets its competitors go through the expensive process of getting developers used to programming for multi-core systems well. Comes up with an innovative and effective new controller that is heavily patented. The controller vs multicore seems to favor Nintendo for cost at least. Then, in the next generation takes advantage of this, go multi-core, go HD in whatever is the most effective format(blue-ray, HD-DVD, holographic cheese paper, etc) when customers might be starting to feel the need for that HD compatible player in a simple or convient device. Of course, Microsoft and Sony are not blind or stupid and will do the same thing. The question stands currently, will the pretty picture or touching win out this generation. And how good are their lawyers. :p
 
Nintendo is usually the innovator - I don't understand how you can make the assumption that it's single core based on the fact that you can use the GC SDK. Take the PS3 as a good example. It uses a PPC Core with 7 SPE's (the cell), yet the dev kits were a single-core PPC with a 6800SLI setup. Clearly less power than the final system, but usable as a dev kit. As far as HD is concerned, Nintendo is still reconsidering its decision, as cited by many in the industry. However, if Iwata-son says that "the system won't have as much power as the other 2 on paper, but when you hook it up to a TV, you won't see much difference" <paraphrased> It sounds really similar to the situation with the Gamecube... In that, the specs were downplayed, and Microsoft said that the X-Box was 3503593208523958 times more powerful than the Cube, when in reality, they aren't far apart in horsepower.

I could very well be wrong and the thing could turn out to be single core - hell with the size and suggested pricetag ($200ish) it wouldn't be hard to fathom. However, if developers can finally learn how to put multicore to use (they still haven't really done so) then wouldn't it also be true that the competition would have a significant advantage? I don't think Nintendo's stupid enough to put a significant visual advantage, despite the fact that I personally care more about gameplay than visuals, and they share that philosiphy. They know that there are a LOT of graphic whores down there, despite the fact that they have a significant advantage with their controller.
 
steviep said:
I could very well be wrong and the thing could turn out to be single core - hell with the size and suggested pricetag ($200ish) it wouldn't be hard to fathom. However, if developers can finally learn how to put multicore to use (they still haven't really done so) then wouldn't it also be true that the competition would have a significant advantage? I don't think Nintendo's stupid enough to put a significant visual advantage, despite the fact that I personally care more about gameplay than visuals, and they share that philosiphy. They know that there are a LOT of graphic whores down there, despite the fact that they have a significant advantage with their controller.
Click to expand...
Like you said, games and multi-core programming aren't that familiar with each other yet. The assumption that this combination will instantly lead to a huge increase in visual performance unachievable with a single-core system is therefore somewhat unrealistic.

Looking at the consoles we've seen released so far, we can say that Nintendo prefers to innovate mostly in regards to peripherals (analog stick, touch screen, gyros) and have these peripherals accompanied by a well-balanced system.

Sony prefers things to be more flashy and risky. The PS1 was relatively conservative, but the PS2 and now the PS3 are increasingly less so.

MSFT clearly goes for the brute-force approach. This is best displayed in a comparison between the XBox and the GC, with the latter having a nearly twice as slow CPU (450 vs 733 MHz) and far less RAM (24 vs ~64ish), but with both systems nearly matched in performance.

Also, don't forget that Nintendo's decision not to support HD means that they don't have to push that many pixels, so they can do with a system that is four times as slow in terms of graphics performance, and still win :)
 
While I agree that 480p does look good on a television, why is it that Nintendo is now reconsidering the "No HD" thing and the industry is saying that 720p might be in the works?

I believe that Nintendo's system was more "bang for your buck", especially visually, because they designed it so effeciently. (i.e. the 1T-SRAM is a good example)
Are you suggesting that a single core revolution, if designed effeciently enough, could match or even surpass the 3-core X360 or the 1-core (+ 7-subcores) of the PS3 visually? While I wouldn't put it past them, I still would find it difficult to fathom. I would still think that they would go dual-core just to be safe, and it would offer a better power balance to the other 2.
 
steviep said:
While I agree that 480p does look good on a television, why is it that Nintendo is now reconsidering the "No HD" thing and the industry is saying that 720p might be in the works?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that they won't go with a limited form of HD (like 720p), just that it's quite unlikely.

Think about it, what percentage of the people who will buy one or more of the new consoles will own a HD TV? What percentage of those people would be bothered by having non-HD content displayed on their HDTV? I figure it'll be a number below 10%.

I believe that Nintendo's system was more "bang for your buck", especially visually, because they designed it so effeciently. (i.e. the 1T-SRAM is a good example)
Are you suggesting that a single core revolution, if designed effeciently enough, could match or even surpass the 3-core X360 or the 1-core (+ 7-subcores) of the PS3 visually? While I wouldn't put it past them, I still would find it difficult to fathom. I would still think that they would go dual-core just to be safe, and it would offer a better power balance to the other 2.
Click to expand...
Any developer who has some experience with multi-threaded programming knows that a) it's not easy and b) it makes development time increase significantly. Then it turns out that the Cell and Xenon CPUs are quite different from existing multi-core systems, so existing knowledge on programming for such systems is only partially useful when it comes to programming for the PS3 and X360.

Cell works fine as a standard single-core CPU, but has anyone ever really programmed for one of these SPEs? From an academic point of view, Cell is fascinating, but I question whether it's truly practical, especially with hundreds of programmers who have virtually zero experience with such a programming environment suddenly being confronted with it.

Xenon is nearly as risky as Itanium and other VLIW CPUs in that it relies on the compiler to get things right, and still features some fundamental bottlenecks, especially when it comes to branch-intensive code (AI in particular) due to the lack of a branch-prediction unit. Therefore the same practicality issues apply here.
 
How are we certain that the revolution's PPC core will be dissimilar than the PPC core in either system? 720p is the standard on the X360, and I wouldn't put it past Nintendo that there's enough under the hood to display 720p on games which developers would like to make HD. I agree that HD (for me certainly) is an afterthought, certainly for non-PC games, but the market penetration is poised to increase. Certainly, for the next round of consoles, they will all do 1080p, but a lot of graphics whores see the disclusion of HD as a negative, rather than a positive (i.e. you can push a lot more polys with 480p).

While I did read that the Xenon CPU "performs like a 1.7ghz P3 without optimization", why is it that some prominent PC developers (newell and carmack come to mind) are lauding the Xenon as the mother of their next children? Is it money that's talking? A lot of interesting questions are presented with the ineffeciencies of both the Cell & the Xenon.
 
For the love of all that is Holy!!!! SHUT UP UNTIL THEY ARE ALL OUT!!!! [Howard Dean Scream goes here]
 
The revolution looks to be so yummy! Imagine all kinds of cool games that would come out for it.
http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/651/651334/vid_1249127.html

Cooking games? Sign me up :p
Fishing games would look pretty darn slick.

Swordfighting games would also be awesome, I mean imagine playing Zelda and you actually have to FIGHT your enemies, so no more press a button to block, then press another button to attack, you have to actually make motions to do it!

Maybe a game like Dance Dance Revolution combining the controller with a dance mat?

So you can practice dancing with a virtual partner or something. The controller can be useful for things like turns and such. Or maybe a Rave Rave Revolution !! :eek:

The controller has some awesome workout potential. The days of sitting on the couch mindlessly playing games are over! With revolution, you're gonna have to MOVE (moving=burncalories=yay no more weight gain ftw) The possibilities are endless....let's hope those Revolution developers are as creative as their Canadian marketing department!

As for PS3 I want to see some quirky games like Katamari Damacy, except you get to roll over ALL the physics objects and such.

As for asian being weird.....the word "weird" is a relative term. So weird in "your" culture may not be weird in another. Proud to be Asian :D Pearl milk drinks FTW :p
 
Tiny, we are all interested in gathering some facts/conjecture/speculation here. If you're not, you don't have to click on this thread :)
 
If that is the case, then everything about the PS3 can be thrown out the Window, and since the X360 isn't out yet, we can throw most of that out as well. Speculation is interesting.
 
C'mon Tiny, have a bit of an open mind. I know you can be stubborn (as an accountant, you certainly have to be), but sometimes it's fun to speculate - especially when it gets someone thinking, as this discussion has.

Besides, I've seen you speculate in X360 threads, so it's not a new philosiphy to you. While I fully agree with you in the sense that nothing should be considered as a fact when NONE of these systems are out - I find it fascinating to throw around some conjecture without turning it into a flamefest.
 
Part of the reason for speculation is because many people who buy gaming console systems can't afford to buy a system and then suddenly it becomes a flop. I can tell you that it sucks. When the Saturn came out I bought it and was instantly a f@nboy. You would be too if that's the only system you can afford.

Since then I've learned that being a f@nboy is stupid and that you gotta be careful what you put your hundreds of dollars into a entertainment machine.

Especially since today's console systems are anywhere from $400 to $500 with high gas prices and this piss poor economy. So you see Tiny it's worth trying to see into the future. Especially if it effects your pocket.

What I have to scratch my head about is that if these console systems are ranging from $400 to $500 and techincally today's PCs can probably match or beat these machines in power then why not get a PC? I say let the kiddies who drool and beat their stuff to a scratching resemblance of what it was have console systems.
 
Duke while I agree about your assesment that speculation is necessary in the range of purchase decisions and such... I disagree with you trying to turn this into a PC vs console thread :)

It will just get locked. We've already established that both offer different gaming experiences, and each have their own advantages and disadvantages. I will also agree with you that consoles are getting to be way too expensive, but luckily my first next-gen purchase is going to be a Nintendo Revolution, which is rumoured to be priced somewhere between 150-250 US. I see that as a really good thing.

And to add in my opinion: the Saturn was a flop, but did have some awesome games. I share almost the same respect I have for Nintendo that I do with Sega. They are awesome game-makers as well.
 
steviep said:
And to add in my opinion: the Saturn was a flop, but did have some awesome games. I share almost the same respect I have for Nintendo that I do with Sega. They are awesome game-makers as well.
Click to expand...
Still got my Saturn and my Dreamcast. Bought the Dreamcast 9/9/99. I still remember. :D

Only reason I bought the systems was for the games. Too bad the Saturn never got to see a good Saturn Sonic game. Probably what put the nail in the coffin. Had I not played Quake on my Pentium 90 PC I have to say that Quake on the Saturn was the best port I've ever seen. Even the Playstation port of Quake 2 looked like crap compared to the Quake port on the Saturn.

I was one of those gamers putting the smack on the Playstation arguing how the Saturn was 2X more powerful and the PS1 was total crap. It was like the SNES vs Genesis days all over again. Ahh good times... good times...
 
The games play a large role in how successful a console will be, but there is more than that too.

If given the option between two similar games, one that is very good, but can only be played in SD res, no surround sound, and has iffy graphics, compared to another that is still solid, but nothing wowsers in the gameplay dept, but supports HD res, dolby digital, and lots of eye candy, I will take the latter game every time.
 
So you're a self proclaimed graphics whore? :p
Personally, I'll take my gameplay experience any day, especially with the possibilities of immersion with a new type of control :)

It is a worthy note, though, that the Rev will support Dolby Digital, and much like the Gamecube, I don't see the visuals being poor - probably on par with the X360.

Duke - although I supported the SNES in the Genesis days, I still have a respect for Sega because they are a good game producer - it's more than I can say for some other companies.
 
I was considering the revolution, then I read that it will be no-HD, and that to me, automatically disqualified the console for me for further consideration.

The ppl who says that 480p looks good enough, obviously has never seen a properly calibrated HD-TV showing 1080i or 720p HD content. (ESPN-HD, ZDNetHD, DiscoveryHD, Monday Night Football, etc etc). There is literally NO comparison between DVD resolution and HD resolution. My next console will be HD capable, anything less is unacceptable. If I want the Nintendo Revolution simply for it's type of games and not better quality display, why not just keep my Gcube and save a few hundred bucks?

So I'm glad to hear that Nintendo is reconsidering the HD option. To me that shouldn't even be an issue -- HD is a *necessity* in the next 3 years, especially for a forward-looking console setup.

As to how many ppl have HD... Hmm, Students not-withstanding, but EVERY household that I know has an HD-TV. Not everyone has HD programming, but most ppl's big screen TV is HD-ready. I'll probably pick up the xbox 360 to give it a try, but to be honest I already enjoyed Nintendo's games -- they just need to release more details on this revolution unit. However I'm not entirely sold on their controllers that vaguely resembles some sex toy...

cheers,

yass
 
Truth be told, HD penetration is still extremely low in the states. Less than 10% from what I remember seeing. But I don't see why it would be difficult for Nintendo to have HD. They already have component output and 480p confirmed, all a gaming company would have to do (which they are doing for the other 2 systems) is drop some polys and output at 720p. As for their controller, you should really check out, on IGN, the possibilities before you say it's a sex toy... though it can certainly be used as a virtual sex toy, if some perverted developer makes the game for it. Then again, I'm sure homebrew will take care of that ;)

While we are ALL uncertain of the controller, since none of us have used it, certainly the gaming press and most developers say it works extremely well, doesn't make you tired, and most are looking forward to seeing what they can do with it.

To me, even if the console SOMEHOW is locked at 480p, it wouldn't matter so much. Do remember that you can push much more polys and effects and FSAA etc etc at the lower resolution... and truth be told, I look more at the games than I do the graphics. That's precisely the reason that I don't own a PSP, for instance, and precisely the reason that the DS is selling more hardware and more games. In comparison to the PSP, the DS does look like shit. But the games are, for the most part, more fun - and certainly designed much more for mobile gaming on Nintendo's system. The point I'm trying to make? Even if somehow Nintendo is dumb enough to release a 1.5ghz system with a 300mhz graphics core, if they make really really good games for it, I will certainly be purchasing it.
 
And if the Revolution supports the back catalog, I'm not really sure 1080p Super Metroid will really be all that different from 480i Super Metroid.
 
LOL Super Mario 3 at 1080p :D
Of course it will have the back catalog. Nintendo-published games for sure, 3rd party, not as sure.
 
Xbox's of mine that commited suicide: 2
Xbox360's of mine that commited suicide: 1
All/any Sony gaming systems I've owned who decided to explode for no reason: ZERO

Sony 3, MS 0
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top