Comment: Nintendo's Revolution steps out of the next-gen battle |
Information leaked about the specification of Nintendo's Revolution console has confirmed that the company's approach is radically different to its rivals' - so much so that it's hard to characterise it as part of the next-gen race at all, argues Rob Fahey.
Source: Ggamesindustry.biz
One of our first reactions upon emerging from Nintendo's conference in Hollywood just prior to E3 this year, where the Revolution console was unveiled for the first time, was that the company had effectively just conceded the next-generation battle to Sony and Microsoft. It was the most triumphant, optimistic concession we'd ever seen, but reading between the lines, it was a concession nonetheless. Nintendo had just told the world that it didn't want to play with the bigger boys any more. The specification battle, the endless bickering over media functionality and parallel processing and teraflops and supercomputing, were of no interest to the Kyoto-based company that had played such a vital role in defining what videogames mean in our culture. Nintendo wanted out.
Last week, our first really solid look at the hardware that developers are working on for Revolution proved that our assumption about the company's intentions was correct. Nintendo is building a system somewhere between two and three times as powerful as GameCube - no parallel processing, no troublesome cutting-edge chips with their inherent manufacturing problems, no next-generation storage devices, no high definition output. It's got a bit more memory, some internal Flash RAM storage, an attractive, slimline case and built in wireless networking. Back of the envelope calculations suggest that it could launch for as little as 0.
Is this next-generation gaming? Not the way that Microsoft and Sony see it, no. Where's the HD Era? The Zen of Gaming? The Blu-Ray? The Cell? The gigaflops, the teraflops? All of the watchwords which Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 have made into core parts of their next-generation offering are missing from Nintendo's vocabulary. Fed up of the headlong rush towards huge, expensive, loss-leading systems that pack more punch than supercomputers did a few years ago, the firm that managed to make a fat plumber with dubious dress sense and a Ron Jeremy moustache into an icon for a generation of style-conscious children has stopped the car in the middle of the freeway, Falling Down-style, and gone off for a walk far off the beaten track.
Instead of dazzling graphics and massive processing power, Nintendo is offering innovation that's more in the realm of gadgets than pure computing. Their console is loaded with clever features, from the unobvious - the clever way that the company has built a slot-loading DVD drive that accepts both full-size DVDs and the micro-size discs from the GameCube - to the glaringly apparent - an amazing control mechanism that feels genuinely, radically different to any other method of controlling a videogame. For developers, the challenge is creative, not technical - how to get to grips with these unique features, not to work out how to multi-thread their game code or build assets for games on super-powered consoles using PCs which can't yet hope to match their performance.
All very laudable, but at the end of the day, Nintendo is still offering a system which will fall far behind its rivals in terms of raw power. There will be no direct ports to Revolution as there were to GameCube; there will be no talk of the system boasting the most technically accomplished games of the next-generation, as there was with the Cube and Resident Evil 4. Whatever about the debate that still rages about the relative merits of the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 hardware, there's no doubt which console will be in third place in terms of performance.
Is Nintendo mad? That depends on whether you consider it insane for a company to launch a product with low manufacturing costs, easy software development, high margins and strong brands and franchises backing it, at a price significantly lower than its rivals can compete with. If that's considered to be mad, then how do you describe the business of launching a vastly expensive, cutting-edge box, after the investment of billions of dollars in research and development and developer acquisitions, each hardware unit subsidised to the hilt in the hope of clawing back your investment on future software licences? In our insane industry, Nintendo may even be a pillar of sanity.
After all, the last time anyone called Nintendo insane was when the DS was unveiled. Now it's been outselling the PlayStation Portable every week for around nine months in Japan, and you can't buy one for love nor money in the UK, one of Sony's strongest global markets. The most expensive packages on eBay? Pink DS units with copies of Nintendogs. In hindsight, if you can make teenagers think a fat plumber is cool, getting girls to demand games consoles for Christmas probably isn't that tough, but nobody would have believed you if you'd told them this time last year that Nintendo consoles would be facing supply shortages because the female market was tearing them off the shelves faster than they could resupply, leaving the boys scrounging for the odd well-hidden silver unit on which to play the year's top online console game, Mario Kart.
Can Nintendo win the next-generation war without even taking part? Instinct says no. The hardcore will still gravitate to the powerful consoles, and the PlayStation brand - in no small part due to Sony's incredible work on expanding its appeal in recent years - is as strong as it's ever been. However, can Nintendo make billions of dollars, sell tens of millions of low-priced consoles, hundreds of millions of games, and reinvigorate the entire industry with an influx of new customers? They can, and they just might.
The QJ.net Network |
|
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Accessories
Applications
Artwork
Cheats
Controller
Deals
Events
Featured Articles
Games
Hacks & Exploits
Homebrew Applications
Homebrew Development
Homebrew Emulators
Homebrew Games
How-To
Humor
Imports
Interviews
Mods
News
Off Topic
On Shelves This Week
Opinions & Analysis
Previews
QJ How-To Series
QuickJump QuickPeek
Reviews
Rumors
Scans
Screenshots
Site News
Titles
Videos
Virtual Console
Weekend Warrior
Wi-Fi
Wii Channels
WiiWare
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
Comments
What a great editorial. I tend to think that Nintendo is on the right track with Revolution. For the last generation (at least) of consoles, the focus has been on technical specs. Polygons, Texture memory, performance, performance, performance! And in the midst of all that, the games themselves have seemingly taken a backseat. Ya 360 games LOOK cool, but there isn't a single game (with the *possible* exception of Ridge Racer) on that system that I would deem a 'must have'. No I haven't played a 360 or any of it's games, so from that end someone might say to me "well then you have no justification for your argument". Maybe that's true, but I remember the days of gaming where a single new screen of the newest Mario title in a magazine would be like peering into a new world of entertainment and excitement. Yeah, 360 & PS3 games look visually stunning, but none of them give that same sense of "I gotta play it" like they used to. So what's the point? Spend $1000 on a system and games that you'll get bored of in a few months? Why bother?
I applaud Nintendo's (supposed) new direction with Revolution. I think it's time someone focussed on creating great GAMES as opposed to spectacular graphic demos that can be manipulated with controller those biggest innovation came about 2 console generations ago.
Yeah, good for Nintendo. Since they wont be spending much money on production of the console, it should mean a really low price for us. It looks to be an awesome system so far. However, I'm also rooting for PS3. Since the price for the Revolution will supposedly be pretty low, and the pS3 price just as much as 360, probably less, I'll definitely be able to get myself a PS3 and Revolution. Anyways, even now we see the triumph of simple, fun games over short-lived games with better graphics and what not. For example, although it's pretty easy to see that the PSP has graphics much better than DS, no one can argue the fact that no one PSP game is as fun or addictive as Mario Kart DS.
I wouldent say the stepped out of the race (people are going to put it in the race wheather they like it or not), I would say its not going for the gold, its going for the green ;)
Woah woah....PS3 "probably less" than the 360? Have you gone bonkers? Please use some intelligence before you speak. It will *probably* go for $400. *Possibly* $500 when it's first released.
About the DS....is it just me or are all the greatest DS games ones that DON'T USE the touch screen?
They're all sequels to previous iterations on the GBA. Sonic, Castlevania, Advance Wars...sure they use the 2nd screen, but never the touch screen capabilities.
Add New Comment