View Full Version : Rev Graphics barely better then GC?
Jonbo298
11-28-2005, 10:59 PM
Well, got the newest EGM today and according to the rumor section area, early dev kits sent out to developers, they are saying the graphics are barely better then Gamecube.
Hoping its not true but who knows :p
GameMaster
11-28-2005, 11:06 PM
If it is true, I'll only be buying one to sell on eBay the next day. I demand jaw dropping graphics from all my next generation systems and I don't take, "No," for an answer.
Teuthida
11-28-2005, 11:28 PM
If it's true (which I have no doubt that it is) I'm gonna need plenty of cel-shaded games to be appeased.
Acebot44
11-28-2005, 11:38 PM
This seems pretty likely IMO. I don't know, I've got a gut feeling about this, and my gut is quite appeased at this moment with some Vanilla Chocolate Swirl Ice Cream.
But hey, it ain't no Cookie Dough! AM I RITE!?
Ginkasa
11-28-2005, 11:40 PM
Perhaps part of the revolution is that the gameplay is the real appealing factor, not the graphics?
/me shrugs and walks away
Jonbo298
11-28-2005, 11:46 PM
With the way mainstream gamers are graphic whores, thats why this came up ;) :p
DeathsHand
11-28-2005, 11:51 PM
Perhaps part of the revolution is that the gameplay is the real appealing factor, not the graphics?
* Link1130 shrugs and walks away
Or at least that's what they're hoping for, and that they also hope it will actually sell well in a market with 2 graphical beasts...
Anywho I'd heard this rumor before... *shrug*... I could see it being true so that they do focus on the gameplay, while being able to sell it for cheap (Less than the normal new system minimum of 200? *strokes beard*)...
But at the same time, I believe someone from Nintendo (perhaps the prez himself?) said something about the graphics not really being much worse than the 360/PS3 level? Though he could be on crack... Maybe there's some sort of disease that causes every President of Nintendo to go insane?
Canyarion
11-29-2005, 04:31 AM
Nintendo tells contradicting stories about the graphics. First they tell us that the Revolution won't have much worse graphics than 360/PS3, later they say it won't have the same power.....
Nintendo probably thinks the new Zelda almost looks as good as the next gen games.
When the controller was revealed and they didn't show any graphics, I had N64-graphics in my mind. :unsure:
And only NOW the dev kits are out? :hmm:
I thought they said a while back that kits were already "out there." Though who knows what kind they were and how many received them?
There's no real way to quantify what "not much worse" means. I will be quite disappointed if there is a noticeable difference between revolution graphics and 360 graphics.
MuGen
11-29-2005, 06:01 PM
After seeing the Revolution controller, I highly doubt they put any more emphasis on their graphical leaps and bounds, then needed. I think they worked more towards a way to make their controller revolutionary, rather then making a beast of a machine.
The only thing we can REALLY confirm that it's going to at least have better graphics then the Gamecube......... but how much better is another question.
Jason1
11-29-2005, 09:29 PM
Barely better than gamecube? Somehow I doubt this...I mean technology has come a long way in 5 years time, surely they can at least double the power of the Gamecube for fairly cheap? Correct?
Canyarion
11-30-2005, 04:02 AM
Yeah pretty good point. And somehow I can't imagine ATI delivering something cheap like that.
of course they CAN make the graphics better.. the question is how much less of a cost would nintendo want to make it.. by making it not as technologically advanced as the otheres they could hit thier target market much better by getting the price even lower the expected.
im not saying this is true or not, but just that there would obviously be reasons they'd do what they decide to do.
MuGen
11-30-2005, 11:06 AM
like i said... the only real thing we can believe at this point is that they'll at least be better than the gcn
Crash
11-30-2005, 06:32 PM
We already knew that it wouldn't be much better than the gamecube, remember the metroid video?
I dont care about graphics though, that's why I have an xbox 360
Jason1
11-30-2005, 08:28 PM
We already knew that it wouldn't be much better than the gamecube, remember the metroid video?
I dont care about graphics though, that's why I have an xbox 360
That half a secon metroid video was obviously WAY early in development. I honestly dont think you should use that as an example.
Jonbo298
12-01-2005, 01:30 AM
Are you guys talking about the metroid demo some magazine people got to play but with the rev controller or something else?
Canyarion
12-01-2005, 05:46 AM
Something else. Nintendo showed a tiny trailer of Samus standing somewhere..... Graphics were... not noticably better than GCN. They would have been better off not showing that.
Teuthida
12-01-2005, 03:45 PM
Samus seemed just a tad more detailed. Eh. The surrounding world looked pretty cool though. Stylistic > Realistic anyday...well most days. Not expecting the graphics to blow me away or anything. People will be interested in the gameplay. And if developers take the extra time and energy they can make a game look pretty damn nice even with lacking power.
Of course I'm just praying for a WW styled game. I couldn't care less for realism. Never played another game that looked that nice.
Jason1
12-01-2005, 06:06 PM
I was talking to a guy I worked with today who just recently read about the Revolution. He had some interesting things to say. He basically just said the controller looks crazy, and that he couldnt really see people buying into it. Typical response im afraid. Although he DID say he liked the look of the console itself more than the other 2, which did suprise me somewhat.
Teuthida
12-01-2005, 06:18 PM
They'll release a Nintendogs game...more fluid petting maneuvers with the new controller...instant success...I'm not worried.
Xantar
12-09-2005, 01:50 PM
I suppose if 2.5 times more powerful (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/news.php?aid=13482) could be considered "barely better than the GC," then you could say that this rumor is true.
And apparently what's also very nice about the Revolution is that it will be very easy to develop for, especially compared to the multi-core systems from Sony and Microsoft.
many developers are happy about developing for the multi core systems, they say its giving them good practice to have for future computer games.
honestly tho, we hear about hard to develope for / easy to develope for every console gen.. it means very little to most people.
Canyarion
12-09-2005, 02:00 PM
Up until the past week or so, developers close enough to Nintendo's inner circle to have seen any Revolution hardware were working with development kits that were simply GameCube kits with mock-ups of the "wand" controller attached - a clear signal, if any were required, that the system is more about innovative control than about the hardware specs.That explains a lot. :)
MuGen
12-09-2005, 02:07 PM
I really don't think it matters which system is easier to develop for. In the end you get out of it what you put into it. If people weren't challenged, they wouldn't get better.
PS3 and (i think) the X360 both utilize OpenGL and C+ based languages for developers so I wouldn't say they are the hardest ever to develop for considering these are all tried and true languages. Revolution can't be that much easier to work with, unless what they are saying is that the system hasn't changed much from GCN and they already are familiar with it's architecture.
"Work hard and you will be rewarded. Take the short cut, and you will be cut short. Your reward can be financial or spiritual... but it will always be proportioned to the effort you made."
Rev Run
DeathsHand
12-09-2005, 03:02 PM
I suppose if 2.5 times more powerful (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/news.php?aid=13482) could be considered "barely better than the GC," then you could say that this rumor is true.
What I don't get about the Nintendo fans (mostly on IGN boards... when I generalize 'Nintendo fans', I'm speaking of the overall tone of the IGN boards, which really are a horrible source to 'poll', I admit) is that they laugh about how the 360 is "Xbox 1.5" graphically, and yet it's a lot more powerful than "2.5 times Xbox"...
But when they hear that Revolution is "About 2.5 times more powerful than GameCube", they're like "Come on 2.5 times more powerful than Gamecube? How is that bad at all! Imagine RE4 now with 2.5 times more power!"...
As if 2.5 times the power = 2.5 times better graphics...
But like... 5-10 times (or whatever, I dunno Xbox/360's specs) the power = "XBOX 1.5 LMAOZ!"?
:confused:
Xantar
12-09-2005, 03:16 PM
Calling an entire system two or three or ten times more powerful than another system is silly to begin with. But the point I was making when I posted that link was that apparently, the Revolution is more than just "barely" more powerful than the GameCube. Surely it won't be as powerful as the Xbox 360 or PS3, but at least it will be an improvement.
And well, I guess the controller is worth a tenfold improvement in processing power for some peolpe anyway.
Canyarion
12-09-2005, 03:19 PM
We all know fanboys are stupid, what's your point DsH?
It's only called Xbox 1.5 because of that statement from Kutaragai or whoever.
You're taking at face value, DsH. Don't.
DeathsHand
12-09-2005, 04:06 PM
You're taking at face value, DsH.
Not really, I wasn't basing everything on "Xbox 1.5" so much as I was simply pointing out that they are defending Rev's power, yet laughing at 360's graphics...
" '2.5x' power isn't bad at all!"
"360 LOL They call that next-gen TEE HEE"... It just doesn't make sense...
But yeah, Canyarion brought up a valid point... Fanboys are stupid :D
I just love to point out such stupidity...
Canyarion
12-09-2005, 05:36 PM
Yay what did I win?
Not really, I wasn't basing everything on "Xbox 1.5" so much as I was simply pointing out that they are defending Rev's power, yet laughing at 360's graphics...
" '2.5x' power isn't bad at all!"
"360 LOL They call that next-gen TEE HEE"... It just doesn't make sense...
But yeah, Canyarion brought up a valid point... Fanboys are stupid :D
I just love to point out such stupidity...
Except that Microsoft has always preached that awesome graphics are important. Therefore making the 360 an Xbox 1.5 doesn't meet those standards, which is why we can laugh at them. Nintendo on the other hand has always downplayed the importance of graphics. Perhaps then we would be laughing at them if they changed their minds and released a system on par with PS3.
Crash
12-11-2005, 01:00 AM
it will still be a little bit before lazy developers make a game that looks next generation.
I'm glad nintendo didn't decide to compete with sony and microsoft for graphics power.
DeathsHand
12-11-2005, 03:41 AM
it will still be a little bit before lazy developers make a game that looks next generation.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q5.jpg
Let's start off with a picture of Goldeneye.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q1.jpg
Let's move on to a picture of Quake 3 for PS2 (launch game of the first current-gen consoles to be released, not counting Dreamcast)...
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q2.jpg
And continue to a picture of Quake 4 for Xbox 360 (launch game of the first next-gen console to be released)...
Or perhaps a different comparison...
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q5.jpg
Start off with Goldeneye once more...
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q3.jpg
Timesplitters (again, PS2 launch game)
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze7t5gw/Q4.jpg
Perfect Dark: Zero (launch game)...
And those (of course) aren't even showing off the greatly improved animations and various effects...
I seriously wonder how people can look at these images, all the other images, the videos, etc of the games that are out and the games that are coming out in the future, and NOT consider them to be "next-gen" (visually)...
I guess for the same reason people still bash Sony for the PS2 "not living up to it's original tech demos", when infact if you actually GO BACK AND WATCH THEM (http://media.ps2.ign.com/articles/072/072837/vids_1.html), you'd realize that it matched, if not surpassed every single one of them?
People tend to remember things as looking a lot better than they actually did...
I mean have they all forgotten Dreamcast vs. PS2?
"ZOMG That's PS2!? LOL! JAGGIES! That doesn't even look as good as most dreamcast games!"...
And now what do people say? With their MGS3, God of War, Shadow of Colossus, Resident Evil 4?
"ZOMG That's next-gen!? LOL! It barely looks better than the games that are out today! Xbox 360 more like Xbox 1.5!"
Sorry, I just had to get that all out... Probably the issue that's bothering me the most these days, on account'a it's complete bull****... :>
GameMaster
12-11-2005, 04:00 AM
Did the makers of PS2 really promise Toy Story 2 graphics? If they did, then that was an obvious lie. We won't see Toy Story 2 graphics until PS4 or PS5.
Teuthida
12-11-2005, 04:07 AM
We need a FPS playing the role of Woody.
We need a FPS playing the role of Woody.
Teehee...
You said Woody.
That is all.
Nintendo on the other hand has always downplayed the importance of graphics.
Yes, because Nintendo can't compete with Sony and Microsoft. The videogame industry has become a big business industry. Nintendo simply can't compete with Sony and Microsoft, so they are trying to find a niche that will at least give them some honorable sales.
Teuthida
12-11-2005, 10:04 AM
Why sell peanut butter when you make better jelly?
Yes, because Nintendo can't compete with Sony and Microsoft. The videogame industry has become a big business industry. Nintendo simply can't compete with Sony and Microsoft, so they are trying to find a niche that will at least give them some honorable sales.
Hmm do you think they can't or won't? To compete they'd probably have to develop shooters like Halo and other "mature" titles that would damage the whole family-friendly philisophy. Plus they'd have to make a console with the latest in cutting-edge hardware, and possibly start taking losses on each console sold. And even if they sell a much greater number of consoles this way they may or may not be as profitable as they are now. And of course if you look at the gaming industry as a whole (handheld included) Nintendo is 1st place with Sony a distant 2nd. They're beating Sony and MS overall, just not in the specific realm of home console sales (which they are still making money off of).
If the goal is simply to sell more consoles, all they'd have to do is give it a $99 price tag and watch as their sales go up and their profits go down.
Jonbo298
12-11-2005, 12:26 PM
Yes, because Nintendo can't compete with Sony and Microsoft. The videogame industry has become a big business industry. Nintendo simply can't compete with Sony and Microsoft, so they are trying to find a niche that will at least give them some honorable sales.
That sounds like a business Bond. Profit Profit Profit. Thats Nintendo's goal and its worked to their advantage.
To Deathshand: most of those comparisons are bunk anyways. Why? Because Quake 3 was PORTED from PC to PS2 and Quake 4 was PORTED from PC to Xbox 360. Those games weren't build off their specific consoles. Quake 4 on PC still looks better then the Xbox 360 version because of higher resolutions (thats if your PC can handle it :p ) and will have a great modding community.
they wouldnt have to develop thoes kind of 'mature' games at all. Nintendos own games sell great, thats not the problem. they'd need to attract 3rd parties to make thoes kinda games for them.
DeathsHand
12-11-2005, 07:41 PM
Because Quake 3 was PORTED from PC to PS2 and Quake 4 was PORTED from PC to Xbox 360.
That's why I picked them... I compared quake/quake (both PC ports), and timesplitters/PD0 (both FPS' handled by Rare/Former Rare developers)...
There weren't really many other options to choose from when it came to comparing launch games... But if you prefer, substitute images from Red Faction (which would give PS2 some brownie points, as it wasn't a launch title)...
"I seriously wonder how people can look at these images, all the other images, the videos, etc of the games that are out and the games that are coming out in the future and NOT consider them to be 'next-gen' (visually)..."
That was an important part of my post... Because of course basing everything on a total of 4 screenshots is silly, I was just picking a couple specific examples out of many, with comparisons that were as close as I could find...
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.