PS3 GPU: 1.8 TFLOPs ~ Teraflops

[PSX3]

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html

Playstation3's Nvidia-designed graphics processor ~ GPU:

-RSX aka Reality Synthesizer.
-runs at 550 Mhz
-has 1.8 TFLOPS / Teraflops floating point performance.
-is said to be more than twice as powerful as GeForce 6800
-300 million transistors (unconfirmed)
- Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels


sounds like PS3 will be at least as powerful as SGI's Infinite Reality
16-pipe rack systems. (late 1990s)
each of their pipes could do about 10 million textured polygons/sec with
everything on.

the PS2 was about as powerful as 2 Infinite Reality pipes. (20 mpps)

PS3 should easily rival or surpass 16 Infinite Reality pipes (160 mpps)

since Xbox360 pushes 500 million polys/sec and 1500 million vertices/sec
(i'm going by the specs floating around) then PS3 should be almost twice
as powerful.


my guess: 3000 million (3 billion) vertices/sec - 1000 million (1
billion) polygons/sec

even if you figure in that that is PEAK theoretical performance, even 1/5
of that: 200 million polys/sec
and 600 million vertices/sec is on par with a 16 pipe Infinite Reality
system which would cost $100,000 PER pipe, IIRC.

[PSX3]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/16/news_6124681.html

"Sony also unveiled the PS3's graphics chip, the RSX "Reality Synthesizer"
based on Nvidia technology. The GPU will be capable of 128bit pixel
precision, 1080p resolution, some of the highest HD resolution around. The
RSX also has 512mb of graphics render memory and is capable of 100 billion
shader operations and 51 billion dot products per second. It also has over
300 million transistors, larger than any processor available commercially
today. It will be manufactured using the 90nm process with 8 layers of
metal. The RSX is more powerful than two GeForce 6800 Ultra video cards,
which would cost roughly $1000 total if bought today."



so it is 300 million transistors. that's twice as much as Xbox360's R500
GPU.

the Xbox360 can do 9 billion dot products per second. the PS3 can do 51
billion.

Xbox360 can do 48 billion shader operations per second, PS3 can do 100
billion. shader operations per second


it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was over
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

[Bill Cable]

Post by PSX3
it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was over
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.

While the PS3 is only twice as powerful as the xbox360, that is one
holy hell of a huge jump. I mean... it's a whole nother xbox360! It's
the power of what... 50 Dreamcasts? The leap is unprecedented.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
***@creaturecantina.com

[PSX3]

Post by Bill Cable

Post by PSX3
it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was

over

Post by PSX3
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.
While the PS3 is only twice as powerful as the xbox360, that is one
holy hell of a huge jump. I mean... it's a whole nother xbox360! It's
the power of what... 50 Dreamcasts? The leap is unprecedented.
--

the leap is still a smaller PROPORTIONAL leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was over
DC.

[Bill Cable]

Well yeah... but the proportional leap is meaningless when you consider
the real leap.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
***@creaturecantina.com

[Freedom55]

Post by Bill Cable
Well yeah... but the proportional leap is meaningless when you consider
the real leap.
--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!

Leaping lizards

[dawg]

XBOX360- Three(3) 3.2Ghz HYPERTHREADED CPU's = Three normal and Three
virtual cpus. DAMN!!

Post by PSX3

Post by Bill Cable

Post by PSX3
it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was

over

Post by PSX3
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.
While the PS3 is only twice as powerful as the xbox360, that is one
holy hell of a huge jump. I mean... it's a whole nother xbox360! It's
the power of what... 50 Dreamcasts? The leap is unprecedented.
--

the leap is still a smaller PROPORTIONAL leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was over
DC.

[Lucas Tam]

Post by Bill Cable

Post by PSX3
it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was

over

Post by PSX3
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.
While the PS3 is only twice as powerful as the xbox360, that is one
holy hell of a huge jump. I mean... it's a whole nother xbox360! It's
the power of what... 50 Dreamcasts? The leap is unprecedented.

Did Sony include graphics processing into it's teraflop calculation?
Because I'm sure a highend video card + pentium 4 could produce teraflops
too.

[PSX3]

Post by Lucas Tam

Post by Bill Cable

Post by PSX3
it's clear that PS3 is less of a leap over Xbox360 that PS2 was

over

Post by PSX3
Dreamcast, but, PS3 is still more powerful

I don't think anything could be farther from the truth.
While the PS3 is only twice as powerful as the xbox360, that is one
holy hell of a huge jump. I mean... it's a whole nother xbox360! It's
the power of what... 50 Dreamcasts? The leap is unprecedented.

Did Sony include graphics processing into it's teraflop calculation?
Because I'm sure a highend video card + pentium 4 could produce teraflops
too.
--

Yes it was total calculation power. but highend Pentium 4 and highend
video card only provide about half a Teraflop. Intel/AMD CPUs are well
UNDER 30 GFLOPS - and highend video cards are maybe 400 to 500 Gflops.

PS3 is CPU is 218 Gflops and the GPU is somewhere over 1.5 Tflops.
together the whole system is 1.8 Tflops.


PS3's CPU is a massive leap but the GPU is only a small leap and its GPU
will be eclipsed by newer GPUs for PCs within a matter of months.

[NightSky 421]

Post by PSX3
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html
-RSX aka Reality Synthesizer.
-runs at 550 Mhz
-has 1.8 TFLOPS / Teraflops floating point performance.
-is said to be more than twice as powerful as GeForce 6800
-300 million transistors (unconfirmed)
- Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels

All this over something that most people will hook up to a standard 480i
television. Even if that isn't the case, I have to wonder if this whole
thing is simply a battle between Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo simply to see
whose balls are the biggest. I also have to wonder how much power these new
gaming consoles will consume. To me, the winner is the console with the
games that have the best gameplay.

[Glitch]

NightSky 421 wrote:
To me, the winner is the console with the

Post by NightSky 421
games that have the best gameplay.

The PS( 1 or 2) was always the clear winner in this area. The PS2 is
weaker (graphicly speaking) than the Xbox or GameCube but it's still the
best console. Why? Because it has a plethora of high quality games
(FF,MGS,GT,GTA,PES,....) unlike both X and GC.
Somehow I don't think that is gonna change in the upcoming generation of
consoles.

[Black Shuck]

Post by NightSky 421
All this over something that most people will hook up to a standard 480i
television. Even if that isn't the case, I have to wonder if this whole
thing is simply a battle between Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo simply to see
whose balls are the biggest. I also have to wonder how much power these new
gaming consoles will consume. To me, the winner is the console with the
games that have the best gameplay.

Sure, but Sony are winning on both counts. Not only do they have the
best hardware spec on paper, they have all their back catalog
compatibility (XBox360 has "selected backwards compatibility"), they
have a shitload of decent game studios and titles chomping at the bit
with those hardware specs.

The only thing that could let it down, is software SDK's (which
Microsoft are very good at and which is bound to be DirectX derived).

I'm pretty sure Microsoft are shitting bricks at the moment, they have
certainly been caught with their trousers down on this one.

They may have the 6 month lead to market, but Sony have awesome specs,
and other marketing tricks, namely PSP.

PSP - Selling by the bucket-load now in the US, and guess what console
will integrate seamlessly with the PSP (clue: it's not got 360 in the
title), Sony are getting their customers TODAY, and will lure them with
PSP-PS3 integration (and full PS2 back compatibility). Wondered why the
PS3 has Wireless networking as std, and so does the PSP. It does not
take a rocket scientist to see where it's going...

[b***@yahoo.com]

Post by Black Shuck
Sure, but Sony are winning on both counts. Not only do they have the
best hardware spec on paper, they have all their back catalog
compatibility (XBox360 has "selected backwards compatibility"), they
have a shitload of decent game studios and titles chomping at the bit
with those hardware specs.

Do you really believe the GFlOP/TFLOP bullshit from either company?
Based on estimation of system power by supposed GFLOPS stats, the PS2
was supposed to be more powerful than the Xbox too, and look at how
things really turned out in the last generation. I'll be really happy
if the PS3 can deliver twice the performance of Xbox 360 in six months
after Xbox360's launch but I truly doubt that it will happen. You've
got to keep in mind that the specs are just marketing hype and not
verified by anyone with credibility. If Xbox360 is in trouble, it's
more due to the fact that MS still hasn't been able to garner solid
support from the Japanese developers. The Japanese titles for the
Xbox360 are still mostly no-name titles, just like the majority of the
Japanese Xbox games.

[NightSky 421]

Post by Black Shuck
Sure, but Sony are winning on both counts. Not only do they have the
best hardware spec on paper, they have all their back catalog
compatibility (XBox360 has "selected backwards compatibility"), they
have a shitload of decent game studios and titles chomping at the bit
with those hardware specs.
The only thing that could let it down, is software SDK's (which
Microsoft are very good at and which is bound to be DirectX derived).
I'm pretty sure Microsoft are shitting bricks at the moment, they have
certainly been caught with their trousers down on this one.
They may have the 6 month lead to market, but Sony have awesome specs,
and other marketing tricks, namely PSP.
PSP - Selling by the bucket-load now in the US, and guess what console
will integrate seamlessly with the PSP (clue: it's not got 360 in the
title), Sony are getting their customers TODAY, and will lure them with
PSP-PS3 integration (and full PS2 back compatibility). Wondered why the
PS3 has Wireless networking as std, and so does the PSP. It does not
take a rocket scientist to see where it's going...

Even I must concede that Sony will likely "win" the next round of the
console wars. I'm sure Microsoft will hold it's own with the Xbox 360, but
I think the only question mark at this point is if people will like the
controller that comes with the PS3. Maybe there will be after-market
controllers that more closely follow the ergonomics of the PS2 controllers,
but we will see. Still, full backwards compatibility will score Sony some
points with users. I'm not thrilled about selective backwards compatibility
that the Xbox 360 will have.

[Black Shuck]

Post by NightSky 421

Post by Black Shuck
Sure, but Sony are winning on both counts. Not only do they have the
best hardware spec on paper, they have all their back catalog
compatibility (XBox360 has "selected backwards compatibility"), they
have a shitload of decent game studios and titles chomping at the bit
with those hardware specs.
The only thing that could let it down, is software SDK's (which
Microsoft are very good at and which is bound to be DirectX derived).
I'm pretty sure Microsoft are shitting bricks at the moment, they have
certainly been caught with their trousers down on this one.
They may have the 6 month lead to market, but Sony have awesome specs,
and other marketing tricks, namely PSP.
PSP - Selling by the bucket-load now in the US, and guess what console
will integrate seamlessly with the PSP (clue: it's not got 360 in the
title), Sony are getting their customers TODAY, and will lure them with
PSP-PS3 integration (and full PS2 back compatibility). Wondered why the
PS3 has Wireless networking as std, and so does the PSP. It does not
take a rocket scientist to see where it's going...

Even I must concede that Sony will likely "win" the next round of the
console wars. I'm sure Microsoft will hold it's own with the Xbox 360, but
I think the only question mark at this point is if people will like the
controller that comes with the PS3. Maybe there will be after-market
controllers that more closely follow the ergonomics of the PS2 controllers,
but we will see. Still, full backwards compatibility will score Sony some
points with users. I'm not thrilled about selective backwards compatibility
that the Xbox 360 will have.

Has anyone seen the PSP-PS3 planned integration? It's extremely cool.
The PSP not only acts as a portable game console, but you can use it as
a controller for the PS3, and the display will show ingame stats etc, as
a 2nd monitor to the main screen action. Awesome integration. The
added posibilities of having your media on the PS3 (movies/music) and
being able to access them from whithin you wireless range on the PSP is
alse impressive.

[Brenden D. Chase]

Post by NightSky 421

Post by Black Shuck
Sure, but Sony are winning on both counts. Not only do they have the
best hardware spec on paper, they have all their back catalog
compatibility (XBox360 has "selected backwards compatibility"), they
have a shitload of decent game studios and titles chomping at the bit
with those hardware specs.
The only thing that could let it down, is software SDK's (which
Microsoft are very good at and which is bound to be DirectX derived).
I'm pretty sure Microsoft are shitting bricks at the moment, they have
certainly been caught with their trousers down on this one.
They may have the 6 month lead to market, but Sony have awesome specs,
and other marketing tricks, namely PSP.
PSP - Selling by the bucket-load now in the US, and guess what console
will integrate seamlessly with the PSP (clue: it's not got 360 in the
title), Sony are getting their customers TODAY, and will lure them with
PSP-PS3 integration (and full PS2 back compatibility). Wondered why the
PS3 has Wireless networking as std, and so does the PSP. It does not
take a rocket scientist to see where it's going...

Even I must concede that Sony will likely "win" the next round of the
console wars. I'm sure Microsoft will hold it's own with the Xbox 360, but
I think the only question mark at this point is if people will like the
controller that comes with the PS3. Maybe there will be after-market
controllers that more closely follow the ergonomics of the PS2 controllers,
but we will see. Still, full backwards compatibility will score Sony some
points with users. I'm not thrilled about selective backwards compatibility
that the Xbox 360 will have.

Has anyone seen the PSP-PS3 planned integration? It's extremely cool. The
PSP not only acts as a portable game console, but you can use it as a
controller for the PS3, and the display will show ingame stats etc, as a
2nd monitor to the main screen action. Awesome integration. The added
posibilities of having your media on the PS3 (movies/music) and being able
to access them from whithin you wireless range on the PSP is alse
impressive.

Yes, but not to exclude the fact that you'll be able to access your ps3 from
anywhere in the world and download data from the HDD to the psp, provided
you've got a wireless internet connection where ever you are.

[Chris Barts]

Post by Brenden D. Chase
Yes, but not to exclude the fact that you'll be able to access your ps3 from
anywhere in the world and download data from the HDD to the psp, provided
you've got a wireless internet connection where ever you are.

Does anybody else see a huge, gaping security hole here?

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[DaveW]

WHY are you posting these rants about PSX3 to the wrong Newsgroups?
--
DaveW

Post by PSX3
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html
-RSX aka Reality Synthesizer.
-runs at 550 Mhz
-has 1.8 TFLOPS / Teraflops floating point performance.
-is said to be more than twice as powerful as GeForce 6800
-300 million transistors (unconfirmed)
- Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
sounds like PS3 will be at least as powerful as SGI's Infinite Reality
16-pipe rack systems. (late 1990s)
each of their pipes could do about 10 million textured polygons/sec with
everything on.
the PS2 was about as powerful as 2 Infinite Reality pipes. (20 mpps)
PS3 should easily rival or surpass 16 Infinite Reality pipes (160 mpps)
since Xbox360 pushes 500 million polys/sec and 1500 million
vertices/sec
(i'm going by the specs floating around) then PS3 should be almost twice
as powerful.
my guess: 3000 million (3 billion) vertices/sec - 1000 million (1
billion) polygons/sec
even if you figure in that that is PEAK theoretical performance, even 1/5
of that: 200 million polys/sec
and 600 million vertices/sec is on par with a 16 pipe Infinite Reality
system which would cost $100,000 PER pipe, IIRC.

[chrisv]

***@comcast.net

Abuse notice sent.

["Roger Christie" charter.net>]

[m***@yahoo.com]

Post by PSX3
sounds like PS3 will be at least as powerful as SGI's Infinite Reality
16-pipe rack systems. (late 1990s)
each of their pipes could do about 10 million textured polygons/sec with
everything on.

Do you have to have special training to post comparative nonsense like
this, or does it come naturally?

Ian.

SGI/Future Technology/N64: http://www.futuretech.blinkenlights.nl/

[e***@pop.uky.edu]

Post by PSX3
since Xbox360 pushes 500 million polys/sec and 1500 million

vertices/sec

Post by PSX3
(i'm going by the specs floating around) then PS3 should be almost twice
as powerful.

You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype. These
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6 months
of each other. So, you know what:

ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!

Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever released a
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC released
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a discrepency
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?

Give me a break with the Sony hype machine, people! It's not like
they've never done this before (have we forgotten the PS2 hype?).

Face it, in the end, they are going to offer about the same real-world
performance (with Sony having a *slight* hardware edge, probably more
like 10%-15% better performance, *NOT* 100%).

Jeez, people, use your heads!

-Eric

[Android]

Post by PSX3

Post by PSX3
since Xbox360 pushes 500 million polys/sec and 1500 million

vertices/sec

Post by PSX3
(i'm going by the specs floating around) then PS3 should be almost

twice

Post by PSX3
as powerful.

You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype. These
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6 months
ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!
Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever released a
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC released
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a discrepency
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?
Give me a break with the Sony hype machine, people! It's not like
they've never done this before (have we forgotten the PS2 hype?).
Face it, in the end, they are going to offer about the same real-world
performance (with Sony having a *slight* hardware edge, probably more
like 10%-15% better performance, *NOT* 100%).
Jeez, people, use your heads!
-Eric

Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs, there
*will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released that close to
one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy between the PS3 and Xbox
360.

[Robert P Holley]

Post by Android

Post by PSX3

Post by PSX3
since Xbox360 pushes 500 million polys/sec and 1500 million

vertices/sec

Post by PSX3
(i'm going by the specs floating around) then PS3 should be almost

twice

Post by PSX3
as powerful.

You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype. These
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6 months
ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!
Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever

released a

Post by Android

Post by PSX3
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC

released

Post by Android

Post by PSX3
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a

discrepency

Post by Android

Post by PSX3
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?
Give me a break with the Sony hype machine, people! It's not like
they've never done this before (have we forgotten the PS2 hype?).
Face it, in the end, they are going to offer about the same

real-world

Post by Android

Post by PSX3
performance (with Sony having a *slight* hardware edge, probably more
like 10%-15% better performance, *NOT* 100%).
Jeez, people, use your heads!
-Eric

Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs, there
*will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released that close to
one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy between the PS3 and Xbox
360.

I think we thought that back in 2001 with the GC specs but it certainly
was a more powerful machine than the PS2.

[Fred Liken]

Post by Robert P Holley
I think we thought that back in 2001 with the GC specs but it certainly
was a more powerful machine than the PS2.

Yeah, it's just silly to boast too much at this point.

[Jordan]

The weird thing was that I thought the bottleneck was going to be their
(Nintendos) insistance on custom 3" media. Turns out the bottleneck was
in corporate vision. "People want simple games! They don't want
complicated games!" Uh.... wrong!

- Jordan

[Zackman]

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract any third
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just scaling things
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it sounds like
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other machines,
in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to have. And how do you
attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least powerful and
(likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?

Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?

-Z-

[massivegrooves]

--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract any third
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just scaling things
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it sounds like
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to have. And
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as hell have
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made by people
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look like
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after this
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have happen. Fewer
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been growing
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts they
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is something
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is about done.
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message boards in
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is THE key to
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything and have
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to accomplish that
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only company after
this round of consoles.

[Robin]

Post by massivegrooves
Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is
something that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks
then Nintendo is about done. Seems with them and thier fans
(seen quite a bit in some message boards in some
E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is
THE key to everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it
will change everything and have people (and developers)
flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a part of
it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to
accomplish that and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo
being a handheld only company after this round of consoles.

Forget a new controller. I want to see a "magical
revolution" in games. I don't want to see all of the new
power wasted on the same old games. I want detailed plots
and story lines that are not just relayed in cut scenes
between levels, but are an actual part of gamepley

[Android]

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract any third
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just scaling things
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it sounds like
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to have. And
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as hell have
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made by people
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look like
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after this
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have happen. Fewer
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been growing
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts they
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is something
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is about done.
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message boards in
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is THE key to
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything and have
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to accomplish that
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only company after
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more expensive
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks with its
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then totally
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with massive
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and slots for
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine that is
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It plays
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to download
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of people will
care about. Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking it has
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just can't
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting trounced in
the hardware market.

Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move towards
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great franchises,
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are some of
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their catalog
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and Xbox 360.
Right now, the company reminds me of Disney circa 1980--they have a brand
name that everyone knows, and characters that everyone loves, but they are
getting trounced by the competition and are no longer considered the
powerhouse they once were.

If they want to remain in the hardware business, they should start with a
new logo, come up with hardware powerful enough to take on Sony and MS, and
use their earnings to purchase additional development studios and/or
encourage more third-party developers to support them. Or become a
publisher for competing systems and focus all remaining efforts on the
handheld market. Otherwise, I'm afraid that they are continuing their slow
march toward irrelevancy.

[massivegrooves]

--

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract any

third

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just scaling

things

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it sounds

like

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to have.

And

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as hell have
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made by

people

Post by massivegrooves
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look like
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after this
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have happen.

Fewer

Post by massivegrooves
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been growing
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts they
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is

something

Post by massivegrooves
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is about done.
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message boards in
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is THE key

to

Post by massivegrooves
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything and

have

Post by massivegrooves
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to accomplish

that

Post by massivegrooves
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only company

after

Post by massivegrooves
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more expensive
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks with its
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then totally
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with massive
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and slots for
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine that is
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It plays
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to download
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of people will
care about.

I have seen a lot of Nintendo fans saying that this downloading of old games
is going to be such a HUGE feature, but honestly I can't see it. Seems to me
it is going to have a very limited appeal. Mainly those that are the loyal
Nintendo fans, to some that may have missed a game here and there and would
like to try it out. People are not going to flock to this new console just
to be able to download/purchase old titles to play on a new system, new
system people want NEW games. I don't see a huge number of kids suddenly
wanting to play all these old games either, for us older folks it is fun to
go back and play some now and then...take a trip down memory lane. For a lot
of kids though who have grown up on todays more flashy graphics and all it
can be more like...uuughhh, you guys thought this was cool.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking it has
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just can't
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting trounced in
the hardware market.

Listening to what was said at E3 by them they are either not concerned or
totally out of it, I am leaning towards totally out of it...maybe ate a few
too many magic mushrooms or something. All things so far look to them
getting trounced one more time in the hardware/console area.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move towards
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great franchises,
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are some of
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their catalog
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and Xbox 360.
Right now, the company reminds me of Disney circa 1980--they have a brand
name that everyone knows, and characters that everyone loves, but they are
getting trounced by the competition and are no longer considered the
powerhouse they once were.

I hadn't thought of that, but now that you mention it they do in some ways
remind me of Disney. They definitely have got to do something pretty soon or
they are done, if this console doesn't so well...well, that is going to be
about it for them in that area IMO.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
If they want to remain in the hardware business, they should start with a
new logo, come up with hardware powerful enough to take on Sony and MS, and
use their earnings to purchase additional development studios and/or
encourage more third-party developers to support them. Or become a
publisher for competing systems and focus all remaining efforts on the
handheld market. Otherwise, I'm afraid that they are continuing their slow
march toward irrelevancy.

Yep...but I don't see it happening in this round of consoles, them getting
something more powerful and all. Might the next round of consoles, but at
that point it is most likely to be FAR too late for them. Might be wrong,
but it really looks like we are watching the end of Nintendo unfold before
our eyes. Sad thing they are either too stupid or too idealistic to realize
what is happening.

[Hank the Rapper]

Post by massivegrooves
I have seen a lot of Nintendo fans saying that this downloading of
old games is going to be such a HUGE feature, but honestly I can't
see it.

Plus you can get a large portion of old Nintendo games on the GBA. It's
sounds like an interesting feature but most of the games from the 80s are
very shallow and you do the same thing over and over only faster. I can only
stand these games for 10 minutes before becoming bored with them.

[massivegrooves]

--

Post by Hank the Rapper

Post by massivegrooves
I have seen a lot of Nintendo fans saying that this downloading of
old games is going to be such a HUGE feature, but honestly I can't
see it.

Plus you can get a large portion of old Nintendo games on the GBA. It's
sounds like an interesting feature but most of the games from the 80s are
very shallow and you do the same thing over and over only faster. I can
only stand these games for 10 minutes before becoming bored with them.

Yep that is another problem with the whole thing, a good portion of stuff
has already been put out on the Gameboy's so that kills some of that as
well. Really can't see where this is going to be THAT huge a deal or feature
at all...

[Fred Liken]

"massivegrooves" <***@massivegrooves.net> wrote in message
news:TNuke.22416

Post by massivegrooves
Yep that is another problem with the whole thing, a good portion of stuff
has already been put out on the Gameboy's so that kills some of that as
well. Really can't see where this is going to be THAT huge a deal or
feature at all...

Assuming you bought them for the game boy... but, you're wrong about it
being a good portion, unless you are very liberal in your comments.

[massivegrooves]

--

Post by Fred Liken
news:TNuke.22416

Post by massivegrooves
Yep that is another problem with the whole thing, a good portion of stuff
has already been put out on the Gameboy's so that kills some of that as
well. Really can't see where this is going to be THAT huge a deal or
feature at all...

Assuming you bought them for the game boy... but, you're wrong about it
being a good portion, unless you are very liberal in your comments.

You know what I mean. And the problem lies in Nintendo selling to the
Nintendo fans and not so much outside that, so most will have played them
already be it the originals or re-runs on the Gameboy...

[Fred Liken]

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Fred Liken

Post by massivegrooves
Yep that is another problem with the whole thing, a good portion of
stuff has already been put out on the Gameboy's so that kills some of
that as well. Really can't see where this is going to be THAT huge a
deal or feature at all...

Assuming you bought them for the game boy... but, you're wrong about it
being a good portion, unless you are very liberal in your comments.

You know what I mean. And the problem lies in Nintendo selling to the
Nintendo fans and not so much outside that,

Link?

Post by massivegrooves
so most will have played them already be it the originals or re-runs
on the Gameboy...

Yet many don't own the games or sold them long ago.

[Fred Liken]

Post by Hank the Rapper
Plus you can get a large portion of old Nintendo games on the GBA. It's
sounds like an interesting feature but most of the games from the 80s are
very shallow and you do the same thing over and over only faster. I can
only stand these games for 10 minutes before becoming bored with them.

Yeah, it takes an attention span longer than a two year old crack baby's to
enjoy those.

[Hank the Rapper]

Post by Fred Liken
Yeah, it takes an attention span longer than a two year old crack
baby's to enjoy those.

Hey look, a bird!

[Fred Liken]

Post by Hank the Rapper

Post by Fred Liken
Yeah, it takes an attention span longer than a two year old crack
baby's to enjoy those.

Hey look, a bird!

Ohhh! A shinny!

[Robert P Holley]

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big

discrepancy

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract

any

Post by b***@yahoo.com
third

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just

scaling

Post by b***@yahoo.com
things

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it

sounds

Post by b***@yahoo.com
like

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to

have.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
And

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as hell have
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made

by

Post by b***@yahoo.com
people

Post by massivegrooves
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look like
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after this
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have

happen.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
Fewer

Post by massivegrooves
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been growing
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts they
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is

something

Post by massivegrooves
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is about done.
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message boards in
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is

THE key

Post by b***@yahoo.com
to

Post by massivegrooves
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything

and

Post by b***@yahoo.com
have

Post by massivegrooves
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to

accomplish

Post by b***@yahoo.com
that

Post by massivegrooves
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only

company

Post by b***@yahoo.com
after

Post by massivegrooves
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more expensive
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks with its
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then totally
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with massive
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and slots for
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine that is
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It plays
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to download
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of people will
care about. Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking it has
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just can't
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting trounced in
the hardware market.
Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move towards
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great franchises,
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are some of
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their catalog
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Why in heavens name would they do that? Regardless of how you feel
about Nintendo, they are still *very* profitable. Think about it, they
usually break even or make money from their hardware (the only company
to do so) and they sell millions of copies of their first party games,
so all that cash goes to them directly. No licensing fees to pay and
no rules to follow.

Going third party would be a huge mistake at this point.

[Boody Bandit]

Post by Black Shuck

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360

specs,

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are

released

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
that close to one another...there just won't be a big

discrepancy

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract

any

Post by b***@yahoo.com
third

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross

platform

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just

scaling

Post by b***@yahoo.com
things

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it

sounds

Post by b***@yahoo.com
like

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the

other

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to

have.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
And

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is

the least

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed

base?

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that

only they

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as

hell have

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made

by

Post by b***@yahoo.com
people

Post by massivegrooves
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look

like

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after

this

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have

happen.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
Fewer

Post by massivegrooves
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been

growing

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts

they

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is

something

Post by massivegrooves
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is

about done.

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message

boards in

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is

THE key

Post by b***@yahoo.com
to

Post by massivegrooves
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything

and

Post by b***@yahoo.com
have

Post by massivegrooves
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution"

to be a

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to

accomplish

Post by b***@yahoo.com
that

Post by massivegrooves
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only

company

Post by b***@yahoo.com
after

Post by massivegrooves
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more

expensive

Post by b***@yahoo.com
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks

with its

Post by b***@yahoo.com
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then

totally

Post by b***@yahoo.com
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with

massive

Post by b***@yahoo.com
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and

slots for

Post by b***@yahoo.com
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine

that is

Post by b***@yahoo.com
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It

plays

Post by b***@yahoo.com
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to

download

Post by b***@yahoo.com
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of

people will

Post by b***@yahoo.com
care about. Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking

it has

Post by b***@yahoo.com
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just

can't

Post by b***@yahoo.com
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting

trounced in

Post by b***@yahoo.com
the hardware market.
Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move

towards

Post by b***@yahoo.com
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great

franchises,

Post by b***@yahoo.com
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are

some of

Post by b***@yahoo.com
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their

catalog

Post by b***@yahoo.com
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and

Xbox 360.
Why in heavens name would they do that? Regardless of how you feel
about Nintendo, they are still *very* profitable. Think about it, they
usually break even or make money from their hardware (the only company
to do so) and they sell millions of copies of their first party games,
so all that cash goes to them directly. No licensing fees to pay and
no rules to follow.

I agree with you *but* how much less is that profit going to be in their
direction they are heading/ed?
I guess it will come down to the impact, if any, Sony will have on the
handheld market. If Nintendo starts to lose some of their overall userbase
there and keep dwindling in the console market, you would think they would
do something to try and flex their muscles. I think it's really sad the
direction they're headed considering once upon a time when you would say
playing video games, right away the response would be Nintendo, now it's
playstation.

Post by Black Shuck
Going third party would be a huge mistake at this point.

For now I definitely agree.
That might change a couple years into this next gen upcoming.
I see them once again bringing out a really cheap system ($$$$ wise) that
will score big with parents and their fans that just gotta have their
franchise titles.

[Boody Bandit]

Post by Boody Bandit
I agree with you *but* how much less is that profit going to be in their
direction they are heading/ed?
I guess it will come down to the impact, if any, Sony will have on the
handheld market. If Nintendo starts to lose some of their overall userbase
there and keep dwindling in the console market, you would think they would
do something to try and flex their muscles. I think it's really sad the
direction they're headed considering once upon a time when you would say
playing video games, right away the response would be Nintendo, now it's
playstation.

Post by Robert P Holley
Going third party would be a huge mistake at this point.

For now I definitely agree.
That might change a couple years into this next gen upcoming.
I see them once again bringing out a really cheap system ($$$$ wise) that
will score big with parents and their fans that just gotta have their
franchise titles.

forgot to add...
"But" I also see them being left behind by MS in this next gen.
If MS launches their 360 at a $300 price point, they could drop that price
down comparable, if not right along side of, Nintendo price for their
Revolution. I honestly feel Nintendo's profits are going to drop
considerably in the near future.

[massivegrooves]

--

Post by Boody Bandit

Post by Black Shuck

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360

specs,

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are

released

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
that close to one another...there just won't be a big

discrepancy

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract

any

Post by b***@yahoo.com
third

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross

platform

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just

scaling

Post by b***@yahoo.com
things

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it

sounds

Post by b***@yahoo.com
like

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the

other

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to

have.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
And

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is

the least

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed

base?

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that

only they

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as

hell have

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made

by

Post by b***@yahoo.com
people

Post by massivegrooves
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look

like

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after

this

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have

happen.

Post by b***@yahoo.com
Fewer

Post by massivegrooves
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been

growing

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts

they

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is

something

Post by massivegrooves
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is

about done.

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message

boards in

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is

THE key

Post by b***@yahoo.com
to

Post by massivegrooves
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything

and

Post by b***@yahoo.com
have

Post by massivegrooves
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution"

to be a

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to

accomplish

Post by b***@yahoo.com
that

Post by massivegrooves
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only

company

Post by b***@yahoo.com
after

Post by massivegrooves
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more

expensive

Post by b***@yahoo.com
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks

with its

Post by b***@yahoo.com
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then

totally

Post by b***@yahoo.com
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with

massive

Post by b***@yahoo.com
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and

slots for

Post by b***@yahoo.com
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine

that is

Post by b***@yahoo.com
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It

plays

Post by b***@yahoo.com
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to

download

Post by b***@yahoo.com
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of

people will

Post by b***@yahoo.com
care about. Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking

it has

Post by b***@yahoo.com
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just

can't

Post by b***@yahoo.com
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting

trounced in

Post by b***@yahoo.com
the hardware market.
Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move

towards

Post by b***@yahoo.com
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great

franchises,

Post by b***@yahoo.com
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are

some of

Post by b***@yahoo.com
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their

catalog

Post by b***@yahoo.com
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and

Xbox 360.
Why in heavens name would they do that? Regardless of how you feel
about Nintendo, they are still *very* profitable. Think about it, they
usually break even or make money from their hardware (the only company
to do so) and they sell millions of copies of their first party games,
so all that cash goes to them directly. No licensing fees to pay and
no rules to follow.

I agree with you *but* how much less is that profit going to be in their
direction they are heading/ed?
I guess it will come down to the impact, if any, Sony will have on the
handheld market. If Nintendo starts to lose some of their overall userbase
there and keep dwindling in the console market, you would think they would
do something to try and flex their muscles. I think it's really sad the
direction they're headed considering once upon a time when you would say
playing video games, right away the response would be Nintendo, now it's
playstation.

Post by Black Shuck
Going third party would be a huge mistake at this point.

For now I definitely agree.
That might change a couple years into this next gen upcoming.
I see them once again bringing out a really cheap system ($$$$ wise) that
will score big with parents and their fans that just gotta have their
franchise titles.

A problem for Nintendo though is they have been falling farther and farther
behind, out of the lead, etc.. Less and less people are going with thier
consoles, more people are growing up with PS1/PS2/Xbox's now then the
Nintendo stuff so they are losing that aspect as well at this stage.

[Boody Bandit]

Post by b***@yahoo.com

Post by massivegrooves
--

Post by Zackman

Post by Android
Judging by the Revolution specs compared to the PS3/Xbox 360 specs,
there *will* be a wide discrepancy between systems that are released
that close to one another...there just won't be a big discrepancy
between the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Which makes me wonder, how the hell is Nintendo going to attract any

third

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
party support in the next gen? It's one thing to design a cross platform
game for the lowest common denominator when that means just scaling

things

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
back a bit for the PS2 (or in the next gen, Xbox 360), but it sounds

like

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
Revolution is going to be only a fraction as powerful as the other
machines, in addition to whatever weird controller it's going to have.

And

Post by massivegrooves

Post by Zackman
how do you attract third party exclusives when your machine is the least
powerful and (likely in the next gen) has the smallest installed base?
Has Nintendo resigned themselves to making a game machine that only they
will develop for?
-Z-

Sure seems like that may be what Nintendo is doing. They sure as hell have
NO clue as to WTF is going on, that is obvious from comments made by

people

Post by massivegrooves
within the company at E3 in presentations and interviews. They look like
they are going to be completely left behind by the other two after this
round of consoles...something they can't afford to do or have happen.

Fewer

Post by massivegrooves
people have been buying thier consoles, and fewer people have been growing
up on Nintendo they don't hold the spot in peoples minds and hearts they
once did. Unless this new "magical" "Revolutionary" controller is

something

Post by massivegrooves
that gives BJ's or acts as a dildo for chicks then Nintendo is about done.
Seems with them and thier fans (seen quite a bit in some message boards in
some E3/Nintendo/Revolution discussions) that this controller is THE key

to

Post by massivegrooves
everything, that it is somehow SO amazing it will change everything and

have

Post by massivegrooves
people (and developers) flocking to Nintendo and the "Revolution" to be a
part of it. Honestly gonna take one hell of a controller to accomplish

that

Post by massivegrooves
and bring Nintendo back. I see Nintendo being a handheld only company

after

Post by massivegrooves
this round of consoles.

They definitely don't seem to mind going their own way. When the
PlayStation came out and used CD-ROMs, Nintendo stuck with more expensive
cartridges. Then PS2 and Xbox utilize DVD's, but Nintendo sticks with its
own proprietary disks--no CDs for music or DVD movies--and then totally
ignores the online market. So here come PS3 and Xbox 360, with massive
amounts of computing power, Bluetooth controllers, USB ports and slots for
various media, and how does Nintendo respond? A vertical machine that is
backwards compatible, but which seems seriously underpowered. It plays
DVD's...but only if you purchase add-on hardware. Being able to download
old Nintendo games is a nice feature that only a tiny number of people will
care about. Even if the controller is "revolutionary" (I'm thinking it has
something to do with the touch screen concept from the DS), I just can't
believe that Nintendo doesn't seem concerned that it is getting trounced in
the hardware market.
Someone at Nintendo ought to bite the bullet and start the move towards
becoming a software-only company. Nintendo still has some great franchises,
and even Xbox and PS2 fanboys might admit that Zelda and Metroid are some of
the best games around. They might as well take advantage of their catalog
by releasing Mario, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, et al. for the PS3 and Xbox 360.
Right now, the company reminds me of Disney circa 1980--they have a brand
name that everyone knows, and characters that everyone loves, but they are
getting trounced by the competition and are no longer considered the
powerhouse they once were.
If they want to remain in the hardware business, they should start with a
new logo, come up with hardware powerful enough to take on Sony and MS, and
use their earnings to purchase additional development studios and/or
encourage more third-party developers to support them. Or become a
publisher for competing systems and focus all remaining efforts on the
handheld market. Otherwise, I'm afraid that they are continuing their slow
march toward irrelevancy.

Excellent response!!!!!

[Jordan]

Has Apple ever released a comparably priced system that was twice as
powerful as a PC released just a few months earlier?

Have you had your flame proofing upgraded? :^)

http://www.barefeats.com/macvpc.html

This has been happening in the Mac Vs. PC battles almost since Apple
adopted the Power PC chip. Which makes todays news even stranger....
Get this....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050523/ap_on_hi_te/apple_intel

Report: Apple Explores Use of Intel Chips

Mon May 23,11:55 AM ET

NEW YORK - In what would be a major shift in the computer world, Apple
reportedly is talking with Intel about using its chips in its
Macintosh line.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the computer maker has been
meeting with Intel, the world's largest chipmaker. The newspaper cited
two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between
the companies as saying that Apple will agree to use Intel chips.

Neither company would discuss the report, which Apple calls
speculation.

According to the Journal, it is unclear what a deal would mean to
Apple's relationship with IBM. Big Blue is the major chip supplier for
Macintosh computers.

The report said talks between Apple and Intel could fail, as they have
before, or Apple could be engaging in negotiations with Intel to gain
leverage over IBM.

[Bill Cable]

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype. These
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6 months
ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!
Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever released a
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC released
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a

discrepency

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?

Moore's Law predicts that performance doubles every 12 months. And
Nvidia is fond of proclaiming "Moore's Law is for wimps." So a
significant difference in performance would not be unexpected. And
given the exponential nature of the progression of computer
performance, 6 months in 2005/2006 is a hell of a lot more significant
than 6 months was in 1999/2000. I mean, we're talking about over a
TERAFLOP more processing power. An *expletive* TERAFLOP! That's ONE
TRILLION floating point calculations PER SECOND. And that's the
DIFFERENCE between the xbox360 at 1 teraflop, and the PS3 at 2
teraflops.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
***@creaturecantina.com

[Grinder]

Post by PSX3

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype.

These

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6

months

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!
Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever released

a

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC released
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a

discrepency

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?

Moore's Law predicts that performance doubles every 12 months.

I swear this isn't to nitpick -- I just thought you might like the
information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

Post by PSX3
And
Nvidia is fond of proclaiming "Moore's Law is for wimps." So a
significant difference in performance would not be unexpected. And
given the exponential nature of the progression of computer
performance, 6 months in 2005/2006 is a hell of a lot more significant
than 6 months was in 1999/2000. I mean, we're talking about over a
TERAFLOP more processing power. An *expletive* TERAFLOP! That's ONE
TRILLION floating point calculations PER SECOND. And that's the
DIFFERENCE between the xbox360 at 1 teraflop, and the PS3 at 2
teraflops.
--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!

[Bill Cable]

I know the specifics of Moore's Law is about the doubling of
transistors every year and a half. But the practical implication is a
doubling of performance.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
***@creaturecantina.com

[Robert P Holley]

Post by PSX3

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
You know, I'm getting a little sick of all this 360 vs. PS3 hype.

These

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
are two name-brand comparably-priced systems coming out within 6

months

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
ONE IS NOT GOING TO BE TWICE AS POWERFUL AS THE OTHER!
Think about it, has this EVER happened?!?!?!? Has Apple ever

released

Post by PSX3
a

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
comparably priced system that was twice as powerful as a PC

released

Post by PSX3

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
just a few months earlier? Has there ever been this wide a

discrepency

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
in performance in console systems released this close to one other in
the ENTIRE HISTORY of consoles?

Moore's Law predicts that performance doubles every 12 months. And
Nvidia is fond of proclaiming "Moore's Law is for wimps." So a
significant difference in performance would not be unexpected. And
given the exponential nature of the progression of computer
performance, 6 months in 2005/2006 is a hell of a lot more

significant

Post by PSX3
than 6 months was in 1999/2000. I mean, we're talking about over a
TERAFLOP more processing power. An *expletive* TERAFLOP! That's ONE
TRILLION floating point calculations PER SECOND. And that's the
DIFFERENCE between the xbox360 at 1 teraflop, and the PS3 at 2
teraflops.

And more floating point calculations are going to improve graphics how
exactly?

[Bill Cable]

It'll improve everything. Physics. Lighting. I'm sure it'll help
with whatever anti-aliasing algorithms they utilize...

But I mean, Flops are really just a speed measurement... pretty much
the industry standard speed measurement... we can use to compare
processors or systems.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
***@creaturecantina.com

[Pray for Mojo]

"Bill Cable" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And

Post by Bill Cable
given the exponential nature of the progression of computer
performance, 6 months in 2005/2006 is a hell of a lot more significant
than 6 months was in 1999/2000.

OK, you misunderstand the Law.

[e***@pop.uky.edu]

So a significant difference in performance would not be unexpected.<<

Name ONE TIME in the history of either computers or consoles that two
comparably-priced, name-brand computers/consoles have been released
within 6 months of each other that have had a 100% discrepency in real
world performance.

IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED. IT NEVER WILL.

Get real.

-Eric

[Android]

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu

So a significant difference in performance would not be unexpected.<<

Name ONE TIME in the history of either computers or consoles that two
comparably-priced, name-brand computers/consoles have been released
within 6 months of each other that have had a 100% discrepency in real
world performance.
IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED. IT NEVER WILL.
Get real.
-Eric

Hmm...let me guess...

The GameBoy versus the Lynx and/or Game Gear? The former being an unlit,
8-bit black and white system, the latter being color, 16-bit systems with
backlit screens.

The Atari Jaguar and the Sony PlayStation? I think those came out within 6
months of each other and yet were worlds apart in terms of performance.

The Nintendo DS and the Sony PSP? Seems like a large discrepancy there, and
within 6 months of each other.

The Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3? ;)

[e***@pop.uky.edu]

Well, I can't speak to the handheld examples in your post since I've
never owned one and have no idea how valid these claim are. But I can

Post by Android
The Atari Jaguar and the Sony PlayStation? I think those came out within 6
months of each other and yet were worlds apart in terms of performance.

Bullshit. The Jaguar sucked ass. In *real world* performance, the
Playstation was MUCH better. Go back and play the actual games if you
don't believe me.

Yes, the Jaguar looked better on paper. And it supposedly had better
hardware (debatable, since it was really just a hyped-up 32 bit system
just like the Playstation). But the platform turned out to be a pain in
the ass to design for and attracted little attention from developers.
It probably had all of three decent games, and none that compared to
the best of the Playstation.

If the PS3 is in any way analogous to the Jaguar, Sony is in a lot of
trouble.

-Eric

[Ted]

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
Well, I can't speak to the handheld examples in your post since I've
never owned one and have no idea how valid these claim are. But I can

Post by Android
The Atari Jaguar and the Sony PlayStation? I think those came out within 6
months of each other and yet were worlds apart in terms of performance.

Bullshit. The Jaguar sucked ass. In *real world* performance, the
Playstation was MUCH better. Go back and play the actual games if you
don't believe me.

You're misreading him. He's saying the PSX was better than the Jaguar.
What's bullshit is saying they came out within 6 months of each other;
the Jag came out in late 1993, the PSX launched (in Japan) in December 1994.

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
Yes, the Jaguar looked better on paper. And it supposedly had better
hardware (debatable, since it was really just a hyped-up 32 bit system
just like the Playstation). But the platform turned out to be a pain in
the ass to design for and attracted little attention from developers.
It probably had all of three decent games, and none that compared to
the best of the Playstation.

snip

Ah, now that's bullshit. There are some Jag games that are not exceeded
in their gameplay on the PSX; Tempest 2000 is probably the finest
version of Tempest on a console. The PSX version of Tempest is virtually
always derided as inferior to the Jag version by people who have played
both. Breakout 2000 is a finer game of its type than any on the PSX
(Breakout on the PSX is utter shit). Alien vs. Predator is a better game
than any FPS on the PSX, even if it isn't as pretty as many PSX FPSs.
NBA JAM TE is better on the Jag than on any other platform, and is one
of the handful of sports games I can stomach. Brutal Sports Football on
the Jag is another.

Of course, there are many great games on the PSX, with nothing on the
Jag to compare them to. And many games that people feel are transcendent
on the PSX. But most of those games came out long after the Jag was done
releasing most of its around 70 games (if you include Jag CD games in
the count as well), after programmers had become comfortable with the
machine. Fight For Life and Battle Arena Toshinden are both horrible 3D
fighters. But later on the PSX produced Tekken 3. There wasn't really a
later on for the Jag, so there was never a chance to see where the
hardware could go. And while nothing on the Jag ever felt quite as good
as Silent Hill did to me, Alien vs Predator gave me the same kind of
feeling; the feeling I was playing an incredible game.

[Android]

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
Well, I can't speak to the handheld examples in your post since I've
never owned one and have no idea how valid these claim are. But I can

Post by Android
The Atari Jaguar and the Sony PlayStation? I think those came out within 6
months of each other and yet were worlds apart in terms of performance.

Bullshit. The Jaguar sucked ass. In *real world* performance, the
Playstation was MUCH better. Go back and play the actual games if you
don't believe me.

I think you misread me. I didn't say that the Jag was better than the PSX
(in fact, I didn't say which was better...but, IMO, the PlayStation was
superior). Unfortunately, as Ted pointed out, the PSX had a late 1994
launch in Japan, which puts the two machines more than 6 months apart. But
if you look at games for both systems--say, Gran Turismo on PSX and
Checkered Flag on Jaguar, or Battlemorph on Jaguar and Ace Combat 3 on
PSX--it is hard to believe that these systems both have 32-bit processors.

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
Yes, the Jaguar looked better on paper. And it supposedly had better
hardware (debatable, since it was really just a hyped-up 32 bit system
just like the Playstation). But the platform turned out to be a pain in
the ass to design for and attracted little attention from developers.
It probably had all of three decent games, and none that compared to
the best of the Playstation.

Agreed.

Post by e***@pop.uky.edu
If the PS3 is in any way analogous to the Jaguar, Sony is in a lot of
trouble.
-Eric

That isn't the analogy I was trying to make. But, seeing as how I misjudged
the relative launch dates of the Jaguar and PSX, I didn't manage to name two
systems launched in close proximity that ended up with disparate technical
capabilities.

[smaug86]

The first prototype of the Game Boy was made in 1987.

[Cordova]

Post by smaug86
The first prototype of the Game Boy was made in 1987.

As was the first prototype for the Atari Lynx, although it was still called
the Handy at that point.