All Gamers Will Love This! =D

[Kishiro]

ESPECIALLY if you are a Nintendo fan.

This is the way of the future. So click and be amazed!

What are your thoughts about this glory?

[zodiak]

huh, okay. I didn't read the whole thing about displacement meshing and all, but im not going to bother buying it. I mean, if people rave about, sure then i will, but for now, im content with purchasing the ps3.

[lord_sesshomaru_15]

cool

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

One- Sure, theres a patent, but it's not as though Sony and Microsoft couldn't reverse engineer it enough to pass muster.
Two- Revolution is still rather underpowered on paper.
Three- It's Nintendo. When have they ever done anything right with hardware?

[Kishiro]

huh, okay. I didn't read the whole thing about displacement meshing and all, but im not going to bother buying it. I mean, if people rave about, sure then i will, but for now, im content with purchasing the ps3.

I dunno. I just am skeptical of Sony when it comes to video gaming industrty until I see hard proof. All of the screen shots are pre rendered cut scenes, and supposedly people who have been working on the hardware and software for ps3 have had many complaints, and claim that a ps3 hasn't even been fully assembled yet with a finished game tested on it.

With that in mind, and no real time game images or videos available from sony for ps3, it makes you wonder how far back they will push the release. =/

I want to play MGS4 and find out what makes Big Boss (Naked Snake) turn evil. But will that mean I have to wait til Christmas 06?

[Kishiro]

One- Sure, theres a patent, but it's not as though Sony and Microsoft couldn't reverse engineer it enough to pass muster.
Two- Revolution is still rather underpowered on paper.
Three- It's Nintendo. When have they ever done anything right with hardware?

GC had the most powerful graphics processor and system out of the current gen systems. Xbox had the hard drive and fast loading speeds. And PS2 had the supreme library. Whats more is that not too many developers took full advantage of Nintendo Gamecube's power. Zelda TWW did, and so did Mario Sunshine (more or less), and also the two Metroid games. But those are all franchise games, so you'd expect big things from them. Zelda TP should be a final and great last hurrah for GC.

Yes, Nintendo Revoultion seems underpowered on paper, but I don't think that is really the case. Knowing Nintendo, they more than likely won't disappoint.

[Darth Tyranus]

That is ooooooooolllllllllllllllllllllldddddddddddddddddd, games use displacement mapping NOW and have for some time. All nintendo did was make it apart of the hardware itself which is always good.

When have they ever done anything right with hardware?

Cube and n64 were good for the time and the snes looks good and sounds good (betetr than the genesis or turbo grafix 16) but the slow down can be a nightmare especially when compared to the other systems of the time. Had the nes not been prone to breaking it would have been fine to, nothing to complain about graphics wise when compared to the rest of the systems of the day.

I'm sure the rev will look just fine, people act as if you can actually make the graphcis look that much better you really can't. Have you seen black (a ps2 game of all things) or splinter cell 4? They look great, splinter cell 4 isn't fun but it looks good, I want to at least try out black.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

No. Nintendo is horrible with the hardware. I could go into any console Nintendo has produced and rip it apart.

The reason NES won was because it was the only real contender, but you find some of the stupidest design flaws in the thing like the zero insertion force cartridge loader, the last-minute RF shield and the 10NES chip. The American NES is a hack job that fell apart by the time SNES came around.

SNES was less flawed, but won only because their rival was Sega, who couldn't do hardware to save their lives, and even then the SNES was a very slow system compared to the Genesis ( In case you're saying "Wha?", the SNES had better graphic and sound chips, but lesser processor speed. That’s why all the best sports and fighting games were better on Genesis).

N64 isn't even defendable, it was cartage based when games had no reason to be, and it was comparable to PS's graphics at best, to mention nothing about the controller.

I've never seen evidence of GC looking better than X-Box. Maybe it was better on paper, but Nintendo still chose a stupid format to put its games on, and never offered any REAL form of online support. And those things kept away the developers.

Edit: And, Yeah. It's definitely not Revolution specific.

Example present in Oblivion

[Darth Tyranus]

and even then the SNES was a very slow system compared to the Genesis

Yeah I already mentioned that, anyone who has played super R type knows this.

but the slow down can be a nightmare especially when compared to the other systems of the time

N64 isn't even defendable, it was cartage based when games had no reason to be, and it was comparable to PS's graphics at best, to mention nothing about the controller.

You're joking right? Some n64 games look much nicer that any psx game I have ever seen (kirby comes to mind). It would have been a great system graphically had that pesky anti alising (sp) not been such a problem. And carts don't have load times and have internal memory, not to meniton they are solid as a rock. I agree cds were the future but the carts weren't bad, they worked well enough. The big problem came with cheapo third party developers not having the money to mass produce carts. And the controls comfort is strictly a matter of opinion. And mine happens to be it was great when it was new and has not aged well. Apposed to the psx controller which I never liked.

I've never seen evidence of GC looking better than X-Box.

Regardless, the games still look damn nice.

and never offered any REAL form of online support

And that has what to do with hardware again?

who couldn't do hardware to save their lives

The genesis was a fine system, so were the saturn and dreamcast. The saturn is the king of 2-d and the dreamcast graphics were cutting edge when it came out.

The reason NES won was because it was the only real contender

The nes won because it revived the industry, and the sms and 7800 don't compare in terms of game libraries, they never did.

Nintendos system barring the original nes have all been solid, any real problems are minor at best.

[Angeleon1]

so the games can look more realistic than ever????

[Regex]

No. Nintendo is horrible with the hardware. I could go into any console Nintendo has produced and rip it apart.

The reason NES won was because it was the only real contender, but you find some of the stupidest design flaws in the thing like the zero insertion force cartridge loader, the last-minute RF shield and the 10NES chip. The American NES is a hack job that fell apart by the time SNES came around.

Yes, this much is true. The NES, being the first of its calibur, had many flaws. Just like any other first generation anything.

SNES was less flawed, but won only because their rival was Sega, who couldn't do hardware to save their lives, and even then the SNES was a very slow system compared to the Genesis ( In case you're saying "Wha?", the SNES had better graphic and sound chips, but lesser processor speed. That’s why all the best sports and fighting games were better on Genesis).

Not true. Sega sucked at marketing. Their hardware was alright. But when it came down to it, the graphics were the big thing that people noticed, and SNES won there. The Sega's one really good thing was Sonic... Not a whole lot else.

N64 isn't even defendable, it was cartage based when games had no reason to be, and it was comparable to PS's graphics at best, to mention nothing about the controller.

The N64 had far better graphics than the PSX, the controller was strange, but it was incredibly good for all the games that were available, and most of all, the N64 was the best party system, hands down. It was the first popular system available with built in 4-player support, and all the best games were incredibly intuitive and easy to pick up. You have a bunch of people over, you're going to bust out the N64 way before you bring out the PS2.

I've never seen evidence of GC looking better than X-Box. Maybe it was better on paper, but Nintendo still chose a stupid format to put its games on, and never offered any REAL form of online support. And those things kept away the developers.

The imperfection is yours. If you have missed what Nintendo did right because of Microsoft's shoddy marketing techniques, then you have lost all privileges to speak on the subject. Here's what it comes down to. The XBox does have better graphics hardware. But the system as a whole, the Gamecube is better. If you want me to bust out the numbers, that's fine, but I'm heading out for work soon, so I won't bother for right now.
As for the game format, that has hardly any bearing on any of it. The small, DVD-based format makes a lot of sense. It holds plenty of information, still allowing for expansion beyond the size of the disk, as all disk-based systems do. Doing all this, while creating a format that is difficult to pirate. As for the first generation games, Nintendo hid all of their loading times quite well. The XBox had some of the worst loading times I had ever seen in their first gen games. Since then, some of the Gamecube games have had to wait for loading, but it's nothing compared to waiting for a loading screen.

Quite simply, if there's one thing Nintendo has ALWAYS done well, it's make hardware that games make use of. Look at the DS. Everyone kept saying how that was just a gimmick, and not going to be useful. And yet here we see what I was saying all along. That the PSP is awful, and the DS is amazingly fun to play.