Brilliant!

Now nobody can say things like "i'm not buying a Revolution because it only does 161.84 revatons per gigaflop and the PS3 does 180".

If Nintendo can show games of similar quality before this whole "withholding technical specs" thing gets into the general public, then they can convince the average consumer that, hey, the Rev IS as advanced as the 360 and PS3...

Not likely though, lol. Either we'll get a leak or someone will tear apart a Rev launch unit and ppost on the internet what it all is.

Either way, Nintendo is doing all it can to avoid confronting supergiants Sony and Microsoft in a purely technical spec war. That includes this hope not to release specs, but also their decision not to show games unless they have real, actual, concrete gameplay to blow away your mind so you don't care about lens flares in screenshots.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

I agree completely with Nintendo's stance. Brilliant might be going to far, but it is true, the average gamer can't make heads or tails of specs. Still power whores will be power whores... Insinuations will be made from Iwata's previous comments and the absence of spec sheets.

"NO #s??? It must sux @ss!"

even if they never officially announce it, someone will take it apart and figure it out.

comparison will be made when the first game pic is released
so it doesnt matter

Quote

---

Originally posted by: DeadlyD
comparison will be made when the first game pic is released
so it doesnt matter

---

So does this mean every dev from now on will sign an NDA?

"So, how's the Rev stack up to the XBox2 and PS3 in terms of graphics?"

"It's not as good."

"Well yeah, I already knew that. But HOW not good is it?"

"Nintendo doesn't even wanna talk about it."

"That bad, huh?"

"Here, have a look"

"I do not have eyes!"

I can play that game too...

*Man meets beautiful woman*

You seem quite pretty
Thank you!
But I am not convinced!
You.. what?
I need your specs baby!
Uh... my what?
Specifications! I do not believe what I am seeing!
Oh you!
No, really.
Uh...
I MUST KNOW! You could really be ugly!
But you just said I looked..-
GIVE ME AN ANSWER WOMAN!
...
Where are you going??

*Man whips out remote and controls Woman with it*

Woah hay, this is incredible, I can control women with this, this is the best remote ever. Come here baby!
AAAAUUUUGGGGHHHH

Quote

---

"Here, have a look"

---

Not when the average gamer doesn't care...Seriously, stop assuming that every casual gamer out there is a specs-whore...

If the average gamer doesn't care about specs, then what's the harm in releasing them?

Yeah, the company releases specs, a bunch of unqualified couch jockeys try to make sense of the specs, come to some possibly innacurate conclusions that might not have anything to do with the games, and then their worthless opinions trickle down to a bunch of other areas.

But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.


Two to three times as powerful as a GameCube...

I have to wonder, when companies do release the specs for hardware, do most people even understand what it means?

"Hey, the PS3 will be able to pull off 453 Megons per second and it will have a max speed of 6.5 gigaflops!"

"And do you understand what that means?"

"No."

They should just print insane numbers on the chips to throw people for a loop. :-)

Quote

---

Originally posted by: ruby_onix


But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.

---

Meh. The specs will get out sooner or later. I mean, they've already told us the name of the CPU and the GPU (Broadway and Hollywood), so it shows that they are at least going to show off something about the specs.

well we better see some gears of wars....mgs type stuff

They should just release Super Nintendo specs and call it a day.

I get why some of us want specs, it will give us some sense of how the games are going to look. Many of us are not graphics whores yet we still don't want a system that's vastly underpowered, I know I don't. I don't think there would be any point to posting specs after the system is released or after some playable games are shown. The only spec I care about this disc-format. I don't believe there has been any conformation on the larger capacity disc.

Well, this does kinda scream, "Not as good as Xbox 360 and PS3!" The only fathomable reason to hide the specs if Rev is equal to or greater than the competition is because Nintendo wants people to judge the system on it's other merits. The problem with that is, the hardcore crowd will judge it on technical merits anyway, and as some have said here, hiding them leads everyone to the assumption that it's the weakest...

Umm...back to the point, as usual, it sounds like Revolution will be the weakest. Which doesn't matter to me that much, but what is driving me up the walls is that I want to know what the games will look like; having specs or a rough power comparison to the other consoles would be the give me an idea, but Nintendo doesn't want me to know how it compares to the others so I sit here aching to see some screenshots.

How will this affect Nintendo's sales? I don't think it hurts any more than having specs that prove Nintendo is the weakest. Nintendo plans to sell the system on the merits of the new controls, so as long as the graphics are better than the Xbox, I don't think matters. Of course, maybe Revolution isn't the weakest of the three. In that case I think it would probably be better for Nintendo to reveal some specs, although it could still be excluding itself from a big chunk of gamers if the system is better than Xbox 360, but worse than PS3 (assuming PS3 is actually the most powerful).

I get why some of us want specs, it will give us some sense of how the games are going to look.

The point is it really doesn't...Their true purpose is to allow companies and fanboys to wave their probes around like morons...

You'll see what the games look like before the system launches, that's all that needs to happen.

I want games, I don't want specs. I don't care about graphics, I want games that I can enjoy and not feel like I wasted whatever the hell they are going to cost next gen... 60.00.

I understood that as "Our system is so inferior that we don't want to show just how inferior it is."

I mean it's not like I'm jumping boat over this but it's stupid...no, ignorant things like this that Nintendo keeps doing thaht keeps them behind.

Yes, they are ignorant, show them the light kirby_killer!

Quote

---

Originally posted by: MJRx9000
So does this mean every dev from now on will sign an NDA?

---

Rev is not going to have to be very powerful to match the visuals of the first gen 360 games.

"information such as clock speed and polygon count is ultimately 'irrelevant' to the consumer"

Translation: we lowballed our hardware BIG TIME and we want to keep that potentially damaging info from the public as long as possible.

It makes sense. If you have such a blatant weakness why show it if you don't have to, right? Of course they shouldn't have such a stupid weakness but whatever.

I don't care about specs and the general public doesn't even know about them. BUT they're still important. The general public doesn't know the Cube specs. F*ck, I don't even know them and I looked them up when they were revealed. However the general public does think the Cube is underpowered and weaker than even the PS2. This is false but it's a common misconception. How did this idea get into people's heads? Negative word of mouth. Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate.

So now Nintendo feels the Rev specs are "irrelevent". Well you only hide stuff when you don't want people to know, right? So obviously Nintendo is hiding weak ass hardware. That plus the "two or three times the Cube" comment just seals the deal. Even if it's false there's enough "evidence" for it to be "true". After all there's no denial from Nintendo on this issue.

So it makes no difference if Nintendo hides the specs or not. The Rev is unofficially underpowered and everyone is going to know that by the time the thing's in stores and that's going to make a console that already has to fight for attention that much harder to sell. I'm not saying Nintendo should reveal the specs if they are lower. But just the fact that they have to hide them suggests that maybe they screwed up.

I'm very interested in what the price is now. The ONLY reason to skimp on the hardware, at least from the consumer's perspective, is to have a lower price. So the Rev better be significantly cheaper than the competition. And I don't mean cheaper than the X360 launch price. It has to be cheaper than what the X360 costs when the Rev launches.

Assumption is the mother of all whats, again?

Edit: I know that Nintendo's hardware is not as capable as the other two next-gen consoles, but your exaggeration of the issue is ridiculous. The 2 to 3 times more powerful (which I assume, based on who said, means 2 to 3 times as nice looking) is a lot closer to home than 20 to 30 times more powerful, which was totally misleading. Nintendo is being modest, and they may have to be, but I suspect they're being more modest than they need to be.

The point is it really doesn't...Their true purpose is to allow companies and fanboys to wave their probes around like morons...

They're telling prospective buyers how powerful the machine will be when you install Linux on it.

Translation: we lowballed our hardware BIG TIME and we want to keep that potentially damaging info from the public as long as possible.

Not necessarily, Nintendo is the only company I'd actually believe would hide the specs even if they're good. They're not playing hardball and they would prefer the general public to be smarter. Specs ARE misleading, you cannot make a conclusion from them without a LOT of technical expertise and even then you'll probably only find out which chips they are related to.
Perhaps they're worried that idiots will claim more processing units == better if Nintendo puts only one or two general purpose cores into their system. What if IBM gave them a Cell with fewer SPEs so there's someone who will buy all those Cells with manufacturing errors, kinda like the Intel Celeron?

Plus there's no point in lowballing that much because the chips don't get cheaper beyond a point. Since they're launching much later they should be able to get specs comparable to the X360 for a minimal price.

Anyone else just tired of Ian? I used to find him valid, then humorous, then annoying, but now it's just like "Why are you wasting my pixels?"

That's what the scroll button is for. I often agree with Ian, but sometimes when I read the first two sentences and I know I'm gonna hate it, I just scroll, scroll away. I used to do the same thing with any post by Stevey, but he's become more readable for me lately.

Umm...yeah, power. I don't really care about it myself. If Nintendo's strategy works out, power won't matter anyway. It's all about the new controller. I obviously can't say until I play some games with it, but the more I think about the Revolution controller the more I'm convinced that Microsoft and Sony are living in the stone age pads that are essentially no different from the dual shock.

"Not necessarily, Nintendo is the only company I'd actually believe would hide the specs even if they're good."

Well realistically, yes, I would agree that only Nintendo would do that. But what did being honest about the Cube specs do for them? All it did was create the misconception that the Cube was underpowered. Specs shouldn't matter just like image shouldn't matter and marketing shouldn't matter. But they do, even if they shouldn't. So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it. Nerds are still going to compare hardware, decide the Rev is underpowered because of hidden specs, and then spread the word that the Rev is the weakest hardware regardless of whether that's true or not. So it make no sense to hide "good" specs because all it can do is benefit them and hiding, no matter what the specs really are, is going to hurt them.

This just tells me one of 3 possibilities.

1.Either the revolution has very pathetic looking specs but is engineered in a way that makes it just as powerfull as the other 2 consols. Just look at the gamecube in terms of specs no one would think it is capable of graphics better then ps2 let alone on par with xbox looking at the specs. The problem is if they are using a system they engineered that uses unfamilliar technology people may hold it against them. If this is the casse it will be clearly visible when games are released.

2.Nintendo may also have very inferior specs which makes it really inferior and they are trying to make it less obvious by not releasing specs. If this is the casse they may be in trouble when they come out.

3.Nintendo feels that over the years specs have taken over too much publicity and by dooing this they are hoping more emphasis gets put on the games and interface instead of the power itself.

"Nintendo released realistic figures for the Cube which, although a very honest thing to do, made their console look significantly inferior on paper. So word of mouth spread. Not everyone is looking up gaming on the internet but they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who does and stuff gets spread around as a result. Internet geeks saw the Cube specs were by far the "weakest" and they told their friends the Cube was underpowered and they told their friends and it got spread around as if it's common knowledge even though it's inaccurate."

see? releasing specs was more harmful than good, not releasing them wont make these internet geeks you talk about to say the Cube is underpowered just because, they need proof of some sort and they dont have it. You and everyone knows whats going to happen, hundreds of fake specs all over the internet, and in that mix even the real ones might be floating around, but it wont matter, the truth is that information will be just really fuzzy, even for casual people who dont read the internet and get their information from word of mouth.

No one will know for sure, but the games will look amazing and just the same as the ps3 and 360 for the average guy, and Nintendo will then be succesful with what they want, which is to people to dont care about specs.

My guess is the systems specs look weak on paper...but is the architecture is more efficient than their competitors chips...kind of like how AMD chips are technically slower than Intel chips if you just look at the specs, but are more efficient per clock cycle and therefore actually runs faster on most applications.

There are only two ways out of Ian's catch-22 quandary of "specs are important, deal with it."

1. Be Sony or Microsoft, release a console that costs 400 dollars at launch, get in a tech spec slugging match with a giant consumer electronics company and emperor of the universe Bill Gates, and buy into the "graphics is the best innovation of this generation" thinking like that Epic games dunce has.

2. Make fake specs.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Quote

---

Originally posted by: mantidor

Quote

---

Originally posted by: ruby_onix
But by not releasing any specs, after admitting that they're going to be behind the competion, Nintendo's going to score an automatic "zero" with those unqualified couch jockeys.

---

Thats the thing, they have never admitted they are going to be behind, they always say "our graphics are going to be comparable to competitors", that "behind" you talk aout its just numbers, and even GC was "behind" in that area.

---

Quote

---

"If you are just going to compare the spec sheets and spec numbers, Revolution may not have an equal or higher number as the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. But the fact of the matter is that if people are going to connect our machine and their machine to an ordinary TV set at home and try to compare the differences, I really don't think that they can tell such a huge difference between the machines," Iwata told G4.

---

man, if the 360 can do 500,000,000 polys per second, why do Perfect Dark Zero models have half the polys that Re4 models have?

Somebodys stealing polygons!

1) On paper the Rev looks weak- yes, it's the most under-powered console.
2) The graphical difference between the games we see will be negligible. This is possible.
3) None of this matters.

Well, there you go. That makes everyone happy.

Yes, Ian and Pale, the Rev is the weakest. Happy?
Yes, most other people, the games will look similar. Super.
Yes, cool dudes, none of this matters. We have the most fun. We win.

Ian, what you're basically saying is that Nintendo is damned if they do, and damned if they don't. If they release the specs as they did with the Gamecube, people will assume the system is less powerful than the competitors, but by not releasing them, they will assume the same thing. So, since you seem to know better than anyone else what the best marketing moves are for Nintendo, how do you think Nintendo should go about this? They're releasing a console that is (presumably) technically inferior to its competition, but capable of visuals that are comparable regardless and gameplay that promises to be unique. What is the perfect way for Nintendo to advertise this fact in Ian-Land without shooting themselves in the foot?

"not releasing them wont make these internet geeks you talk about to say the Cube is underpowered just because, they need proof of some sort and they dont have it."

The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway. And being excluded outright from the hardware discussion isn't that great either. Then the Rev isn't even a contender. It's that "Xbox or PS2" thing all over again.

"Make fake specs."

Why the hell not? Sony does it all the time and it hasn't hurt them. We're the only ones who care if Nintendo is honest about things like that anyway and we'll know they're exagerating for publicity purposes. The difference between the graphics probably won't be that noticable in real life. So why not say you can push 50 billion gigaflips or whatever and let those who care about that sort of stuff think you're better than you are? It's not really a lie if the games look and play great.

Sony said the PS2 would have TOY STORY graphics! That has a huge lie and everyone caught them on it because the games looked nowhere near that level. But most people don't know what specs even mean. They just see a big number and think it's good. So give them a big number and then deliver great graphics and they'll be none the wiser. Nintendo themselves have said that the jump in graphics is shrinking. So if no one can see the difference then they'll be fine. But having this big ??? regarding the specs makes it look like they're hiding something. So why not kill the underpowered rumour and then the games really will speak for themselves.

The fact that Nintendo is hiding the specs is "proof". Proof enough to declare it the weakest console anyway.

What's funny is the exact same thing happened last gen when Ninty revealed the "weak" specs of the Gamecube...Then everyone had "proof" that it was weaker when everyone can see it's NOT...If you have proof of it being weaker through both showing and not showing specs, then WHAT THE HELL? We'll be getting almost identical games visual-wise anyway so please everyone SHUT THE **** UP about specs...

Obviously, Nintendo doesn't want to lie to us. Yet another reason I'm a Miyamoto fanboy.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane

So Nintendo can't just be all "well we've decided specs don't matter" and have everyone agree to it.

---

Quote

---

If the average gamer doesn't care about specs, then what's the harm in releasing them?

---

How the blue hell do you buy any electronic product and not know the specs?

Yeah, well, I had the Gamecube for a good year before I decided to read up on the specific specs...

Now I really don't want to drop into just outright flaming you people but if you don't stop I will...IF SPECS ARE RELEASED, PEOPLE WILL BITCH, IF SPECS AREN'T RELEASED PEOPLE WILL BITCH!...END...OF...STORY...

All releasing the specs (if they look worse than the X360 specs) will do compared to not releasing them will be starting those stupid "comparing technology" articles that incompetent people with no grasp on the actual meaning of MIPS (zero) write and that look like a practical joke to anyone who ever worked on games in any form. "OMG! Nintendo said it's single core! The PS3 has 9 CPUs! PS3 rocks!". Junk like that.

Bill's right. Nintendo can't win by releasing the specs and they can't win by not releasing them... There's only one solution.

We must blow up Microsoft and Sony's HQs.

Who's with me?

Already have a plan, just need 300 LBS of C-4

Back before the jump to 3D, did anyone at all care about specs? Not that I know of. People were busy bitching about how Nintendo had the blood in MK replaced with sweat. I don't recall any talk about specs... Well, there was that "Blast Processing" thing with the Genesis/Mega Drive but most people were smart enough not to buy into it.

So why do people care now?

MARKETING!

Sony came in and applied real marketing to the industry. As in lies, twisting the truth, saying and doing whatever it took to get the consumer to buy your product. How were honest companies (Nintendo, Sega) supposed to compete with that? In a nut shell, they couldn't. And I hope they'll never stoop to that level.

I love the idea of Nintendo not releasing specs, just stating that it's going to be on par with the other consoles graphically. There's been talk floating around that Nintendo's even developed a new graphical display method that lets relatively weak hardware display incredible graphics. No matter what happens, if the games look good, why do you care so much about what's running it? Hell, I don't even care if the games look good! I just want a crack at that new controller.

The industry is being pulled in two directions right now. One is Sony and MS' unending and unwinnable technology cold war. In the end, what will that bring? Umm... a few more polygons here and there, higher res textures? In the end, they won't matter. Technological leaps are getting smaller and smaller. Soon enough most people won't even be able to tell the difference from one generation to the next.

I'm so glad Nintendo decided to go another way, the way where we're actually going to get to play new and interesting games instead of just rehashes of last gen software with a bit of new tech paint slathered on it.

When we see Rev games we'll know whether the system can stack up graphically and if the GC is any indication Nintendo really knows what they're doing even with much weaker hardware. However, when we play Rev games... There simply isn't going to be any comparison.

"Back before the jump to 3D, did anyone at all care about specs?"

Are you kidding? It was all about the bits! The Genesis had "16 bit" printed right on it's front. The Turbo Graffix 16 had the bit number in the damn title. Although it was a huge flop the Jaguar's slogan was "Do the math" in reference to it being the first "64 bit" console. They used to make a big deal about how many megs cartridges were. Strider was the first 8 meg cartridge. It said so right on the box. The Neo-Geo had "100 meg shocker" in the intro for some of their games. Sega made a big deal about blast processing. Nintendo made a big deal about Mode 7. Part of Star Fox's promotion was on the fancy Super FX chip inside the cartridge.

Hardware wang waving has been around as long as the console wars themselves.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Are you kidding? It was all about the bits! The Genesis had "16 bit" printed right on it's front. The Turbo Graffix 16 had the bit number in the damn title. Although it was a huge flop the Jaguar's slogan was "Do the math" in reference to it being the first "64 bit" console. They used to make a big deal about how many megs cartridges were. Strider was the first 8 meg cartridge. It said so right on the box. The Neo-Geo had "100 meg shocker" in the intro for some of their games. Sega made a big deal about blast processing. Nintendo made a big deal about Mode 7. Part of Star Fox's promotion was on the fancy Super FX chip inside the cartridge.

Hardware wang waving has been around as long as the console wars themselves.

---

I've been consistenly impressed with how Nintendo has been managing to dance their way out of getting any negative publicity. This is another good move, business wise.

You guys are talking about how it doesn't matter if Nintendo doesn't release the specs because the masses will infer that the revolution is less powerful. But, you know, I think that's giving the masses too much credit. They couldn't infer that the ps2 was the weakest of the 3 consoles. And they don't seem to be picking up on the fact that the REV will be underpowered now. Nintendo's secrecy and vague marketingspeak about the REV being visually comparable and being "a jaguar inside" actually seems to be causing people to at least give them the benefit of the doubt....which is all Nintendo needs. Releasing an unimpressive spec sheet now would probably be suicide - but by the time the specs finally do get out there, and they probably will eventually, people won't care because by then they'll have seen the Rev's amazing graphics and control and it won't really matter.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: wandering
Nintendo's secrecy and vague marketingspeak about the REV being visually comparable and being "a jaguar inside"....

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: wandering
Releasing an unimpressive spec sheet now would probably be suicide...

---

Quote

---

Did you have to use that quote after Atari's Jaguar had just been brought up?

---

Quote

---

Granted, but I wonder if Nintendo actually had to go out on record as saying they would never release them? ...although I suppose if they hadn't rumors of being way behind the other console makers would have been rampant.

---

The Intellivision was the first 8-Bit system...

"still amazes me, though, that the system pretty much uses a NES controller with "select" becoming "c"... kills the chance to port over any complex SNES games"

Well the Genesis did come out two years before the SNES. They couldn't really take into account porting from a controller that didn't exist yet, could they?

HAY HAY GUYZ I FOUND ALL THE SPECS ITS ACTUALLY HIDDEN ON NINTENDOS SITE LOL! THEY ARE PRITTY IMPRESSIVE
L@@K!

RAB: You forgot to list the DVD playback!

I said it supported discs didn't I? Erm I mean. THATS WHUT NINTEDO SED ON THE SHEET EVERYTHING ON THE SHEET IS REAL IT WONT B ABLE TO PLAY MOVIES!

I meant under "Plays:" you only listed "games".

Quote

---

Originally posted by: RABicle
HAY HAY GUYZ I FOUND ALL THE SPECS ITS ACTUALLY HIDDEN ON NINTENDOS SITE LOL! THEY ARE PRITTY IMPRESSIVE
L@@K!

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
L@@K!

---

No, as much as people ragged on the DS because they thought it was going to turn into another Virtual Boy.

It proved itself to be a great little system, however. Thats why people are buying it.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: TMW

It proved itself to be a great little system, however. Thats why people are buying it.

---

"To suggest the DS would some how survive much less compete against such technical prowess was heresy."

Though I don't really remember anything like that, those that thought along those lines are f*ing retards. In the handheld world, Gameboy is practically always out spec'd and it has dominated for 20+ years. The moment DS had backward compatibility and a reasonable price point, it was guaranteed.
As for the Revolution, I think popular suggestion is it has amazing potential. Even the negative people mostly are addressing concerns in Nintendo's strategy (2nd console, targeting nongamers, etc...) rather than dismissing the Rev.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: 31 Flavas

Quote

---

Originally posted by: RABicle
HAY HAY GUYZ I FOUND ALL THE SPECS ITS ACTUALLY HIDDEN ON NINTENDOS SITE LOL! THEY ARE PRITTY IMPRESSIVE
L@@K!

---

Hm... Didn't we already see this kind of debasing with the pre-launch PSP vs DS debate? The DS was shown to be woefully under spec'd to the PSP and heavily criticized for its input methods. But, we all know which system is clearly prefered now...

---

I think there needs to be a divide between "announced specs" and "performance claims".

Hardware makers usually present their announced specs in such a way so that they can convey some performance claims in various forms, without looking like they're bragging. (I don't really feel like writing up anything more about Nintendo and performance claims right now. Maybe later.)

But the announced specs, I feel they're important regardless. They're like... telling people the name/gender/weight of your newborn baby.

It's like, someone goes up to Shiggy and says "Awwww, what a cute widdle baby! What's it's name?" And Shiggy responds "You don't need to know that. If I told you it's name, you'd know it's gender, and then you'd prejudge my baby, and I won't let you do that." My response would be "Fine then. I was just trying to be polite, you jerk. Now I don't even wanna know your turd-spawn."

And then Shiggy goes on a rant about how his baby is gonna grow up to be the next Hitler (even though his last two attempts fell far short) and that people are already lining up to kiss it's butt, and that when the revolution finally hits, I'm gonna be sorry that I passed on the chance to kiss the butt of a baby I knew nothing about.

So what if he's short? So was Napolean. I just wanna feel like I know something about him before he becomes my leader.

What the hell are you even going on about.

Specs, dammit!

" proved itself to be a great little system, however. Thats why people are buying it."

The DS sold great at launch too though despite one of the worst launch lineups I've ever seen. It continued to sell well though the horrible post-launch drought. It took a while before it proved itself to be be a "great little system". People bought it initially because (despite Nintendo's insane attempts to prove otherwise) people saw it as the GBA followup and thus it sold well by riding on its predecessor's coattails. Now it has deserved its sales but it didn't initially. The N64 sold really well for the first year too because it was the successor to the SNES. The PS3, regardless of how well it does in the end, will sell huge initially because of the PS2 (in fact that's how the PS2 survived the first year).

The Rev doesn't have that luxury. It's coming from a position of weakness. If anything it has to fight off the stigma of its predecessor. So you can never say "well this worked okay for the DS" because they're totally different situations.

Naploeon was 5'10, he may have been considered short by the at the time 6'0 average...but he is average now thanks to our reduced oxygen levels. His height is largley exaggerated...or inaggerated?

Napoleon was 168 cm or 5' 6, not short but still not 5' 10. Reduced oxygen levels, wha?

Yeah, Ian's last paragraph is what i was saying. Ruby that is some serious extended metaphor.

"People bought it initially because (despite Nintendo's insane attempts to prove otherwise) people saw it as the GBA followup and thus it sold well by riding on its predecessor's coattails."

You don't think Revolution, assuming that it has a bad launch/drought, can't ride on the coattail of every console Nintendo game ever made?

"You don't think Revolution, assuming that it has a bad launch/drought, can't ride on the coattail of every console Nintendo game ever made?"

That's not how things work. The Cube didn't ride off the coattails of the NES or SNES. When it comes to a console purchase it's just "what have you done for me lately". The N64 was Nintendo's most recent console and that's what people thought of when the Cube came out. The Cube was largely held back by this.

When the Rev comes out the general assumption at first will be that it's another Gamecube. That's BAD. That will severely limit the Rev's potential. So that have to overcome that stigma right away. The era of Nintendo consoles being huge successes might as well be a million years ago. The Rev is the Gamecube 2 until proven otherwise.

Would you make a predicition on a sports team based on how they played ten years ago? No. You would look at last season.

I think he was alluding to the Virtual Console...

Geez, everyone in this thread seems to have gone insane..


IIRC, people have been getting taller throughout history because taller is the predominant gene (?)

Gearheads argue over car motors, so I don't think this is much different, but most people just drive to the store and get milk.

...for Ruby's baby!

Quote

---

Napoleon was 168 cm or 5' 6, not short but still not 5' 10.

---

Quote

---

Gearheads argue over car motors, so I don't think this is much different, but most people just drive to the store and get milk.

---

Quote

---

...for Ruby's baby!

---

"So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot."

That must have been annoying at amusement parks. "Sorry Napoleon. You can't go on this ride. It says you have to be this tal....uh talkative. Yes that's it. You don't talk enough to go on this ride."

I sort of get what Ruby means. By being so secretive and defensive Nintendo is actually making the Rev look worse. It looks almost like they're a little ashamed of it. They should be proud of their console and want to show off everything about it. By being all "oh the specs don't matter" they're drawing more attention to them.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot."

That must have been annoying at amusement parks. "Sorry Napoleon. You can't go on this ride. It says you have to be this tal....uh talkative. Yes that's it. You don't talk enough to go on this ride."

I sort of get what Ruby means. By being so secretive and defensive Nintendo is actually making the Rev look worse. It looks almost like they're a little ashamed of it. They should be proud of their console and want to show off everything about it. By being all "oh the specs don't matter" they're drawing more attention to them.

---

Screens are impressive until footage shows framerates and animations are actually borked.
(lol killzone)

I don't even know how the Napoleon thing is relevant (), but Ian, I was referring to the games you'd be able to download onto Revolution. I don't think they should have a bad launch or a draught, but that's 200 games you can download, and I doubt anyone has played all of those games.

so nampoleans specs werent as high as some others..he was emperor...REVOLUTION!!!!

and i looked it up before you corrected me..he was 5'2 in french inches which is 5'6 in english inches.
still fairly average at the time...although his high gaurd were above average...so he seemed shorter. I'm 5'10 so he's as short as my brother..who I pick on all the time

Quote

---

Originally posted by: ruby_onix

Quote

---

Napoleon was 168 cm or 5' 6, not short but still not 5' 10.

---

I don't think Napolean was ever really "unusually" short, but he was fully aware of his height, and was oversensitive and defensive about it. So he ordered all his friends and allies to never ever ever speak of anything even remotely related to height in his presence, under penalties of torture and death and whatnot. Which did absolutely nothing to prevent him from being made into a laughingstock behind his back, and only fueled his widespread mockery.

Which is exactly the same sort of situation Nintendo's trying to put themselves in with this business about specs.

---

I'd like specs for the system itself. Not in the graphic card, CPU sense, but in the how many ports it has, what type of disk it will use and of course all the rest of that secret stuff we don't know.

Maybe they should just do that?