Nintendo better off without HD?!

New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
1,392
Best answers
0
from http://www.dsupdate.net/


Ever since Nintendo stated that the Revolution will not likely support HD (High-Definition) content, tens of thousands of people have complained about the decision; many who complain do not even know what HD is. For those who don't, HD is, in short, a technology used on TVs and some computer monitors that allows for more pixels to be displayed on the screen. There are several different 'levels' of HD, each with a different level of quality. In essence, HD content allows for greater clarity when viewing TV or games. However, it comes at the cost of slower framerates, more processing power needed, and more disk-room needed on disk for HD content. Why wouldn't Nintendo want to get in on the HD-craze? After all, Sony and Microsoft are both supporting it...Is Nintendo getting left out in the cold again? Will this alienate Nintendo from the rest of the market? Perhaps...But than, perhaps not.

Is HD the future?

Sony and Microsoft have both chosen to support almost all of the HD formats in their next-gen console. Nintendo, however, has chosen to stay out of the HD-craze. Now, one thing to keep in mind is that by Nintendo staying out, that does not mean that those with HDTVs cannot use the Revolution. It simply means that the content will not have the same clarity as an HD broadcast. For those without HDTVs, HD will only raise the prices that you pay for games and consoles. So is HD the future or not? Sony and Microsoft say that it is, even going to the point where Microsoft refers to the next-gen age of gaming as 'The HD Era'. They claim that by the end of the next-generation consoles, nearly the entire world will own HDTV sets. Nintendo says differently. It should also be noted that at this time less than 20% of America, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, owns HDTVs...Imagine the percentage in other countries. Right now, HD is a luxury, not a must-have and Nintendo believes that it will remain that way throughout the next-generation console wars. Sony has reason to include HD support due to its marketing plan of keeping the PS3 out on the market for 10 years (double the traditional 4-5 year lifecycle of a console). By 2016, HD is sure to be the industry standard. Microsoft, however, has no reason to support HD. Their system will likely last only until 2011 and that generation would be a much more financially sensible time to introduce HD content. In addition, unlike Sony, Microsoft is not giving developers enough disk-space to create large games with HD content resulting in restraining the creativity of developers and the size of the game that they can create.

Nintendo has other reasons than the popularity of HD to back their decision. For example, by adding HD support, the price of a console may rise significantly. This is not only because of the support itself but also because the machine than needs a more powerful processor, larger optical disks to store large amounts of HD content on which leads to a more expensive optical disk reader, and so on. The fact is, HD support significantly increases the price of a console and Nintendo feels that at the current time, the tradeoff is not a favorable one especially considering that not many people would currently use the HD support. Therefore, they see no reason to add HD into the Revolution. From such a standpoint, the decision does make sense but this is not Nintendo's only reason.

Despite what common sense might tell you, Nintendo will likely have much more high-quality games than Sony and Microsoft simply because of the lack of HD support. You see, even if the competition has more powerful hardware, the lack of HD will allow for more content to be stored. HD content takes up MUCH more room than standard content thus allowing Nintendo to cut resources and produce the same game for a fraction of the cost. In addition, developers have stated that without HD, they would be able to do anything on the next-gen consoles. However, since HD will make the consoles lag much easier and will result in poor framerates, it limits the creativity of developers. Combining HD with the strains of developing on a multi-core system, the console suddenly becomes extremely difficult to develop quality games for. Since Nintendo is not supporting HD and will likely stick with single-core processors, the games that developers create for them will be virtually unrestrained. This will also likely gain Nintendo some additional third-party support.

Lastly, as most of you know, Nintendo's Revolution is shrouded in mystery. Though we know some features of it, the console's most important details have not yet been unveiled. We know next to nothing regarding the system....and even less about the controller. Yes, it is the controller that will supposedly bring about a revolution in the industry. Nobody knows anything about the controller except it will be simpler than others. Knowing this, many speculate that the reason for Nintendo's lack of HD support is coupled with the mysteries surrounding the Revolution. In otherwords, maybe the reason that Nintendo refuses to support HD is because it would be incompatible with certain features of the Revolution. Who knows? I sure as hell don't. But I sure wouldn't overlook it...It very well could be a possibility.

So is HD the future? I would say, yes, it is. But is it neccessary for the next-gen consoles? I would have to say no, it isn't. Currently, HD will place to many limitations on the games that developers can create. It will result in poor framerates and smaller games. It will raise prices of nearly all next-gen components significantly. However, by Nintendo staying out of the HD-craze, they are in fact allowing for developers to significantly decrease development time, decrease development costs, and lower prices for games and consoles in the coming generation. I feel that Nintendo is smart to sit out of this craze and I feel that by the 2011 generation, HD will be an essential. Until than, Nintendo will be better off without it.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
This is old news man, it was posted on the first Revolution thread :p

I don't really care either way though, i'm not getting a Revolution, and we don't get HDTV over here either.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
Ravendust said:
This is old news man, it was posted on the first Revolution thread :p

I don't really care either way though, i'm not getting a Revolution, and we don't get HDTV over here either.
I might get a Revolution, but I don't care about HD either.

I don't know whether or not I'll get one. Same with the PS3. I'll first wait it out and see what they're like. My brother said he's going to buy a PS3 when it's released (he's a fanboy like that), and another person I know said he's getting a Revolution as soon as it's released (He's a fanboy too), so I can just see what they're like before I buy. I'm not going to fall for the hypes like so many foolish sheep.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
1,659
Best answers
0
have yet to see anything "revolution"ary....
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
Mad_AxMan said:
have yet to see anything "revolution"ary....
That's because Nintendo has yet to divulge any important information.

All we know for sure is that the thing is powerful, has wireless controllers, backward compatibility with the Gamecube, has WiFi support and a few other things, but we haven't seen clips from gameplay movies yet, and we don't even know what the controller looks like yet. There's still a lot that can happen. Give it time.
 

sub

Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,960
Best answers
0
I really don't care about HD Tv's, its not like I have one. But I am really curious about how Nintendo is going to do other things with the Revolution. I heard that they were going to have a download system that lets you download all of their old games. I'm also interested to see how their controller is going to look.
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
1,478
Best answers
0
This article is preposterous. It doesn't even sense.

Article said:
"Nintendo will likely have much more high-quality games than Sony and Microsoft simply because of the lack of HD support."
It depends on how you define quality. Do you define superior quality textures as being "inferior?" I didn't think so. All the developers have a choice to make their games in HD with XB-360 and PS3, but no choice with the Revolution. Also, all those companies that make quality games that are remembered.. Do you think they just wouldn't be "willing" to make their new games complete? Yeah! Uncomplete products sell so well.


Article said:
You see, even if the competition has more powerful hardware, the lack of HD will allow for more content to be stored.
This one is just plain wrong. Naturally, higher res textures take more space. But Nintendo is being left in the dark again by not picking a next-gen format for data storage, Bluray or HD-DVD discs like the other two are. Regardless of larger data requirements, they have the space to support it.

And despite what this article will have you believe, every single advancement in graphics and audio technology increases the demand on video game programmers. Not just "HD." The gaming industry has dealt with it, otherwise we wouldn't be playing any modern games.

Article said:
However, since HD will make the consoles lag much easier and will result in poor framerates, it limits the creativity of developers.
Bill Gates already said in an interview that systems have gotten to the point where they're so powerful that they can basically do anything in 640x480 resolution. They're trying to push the bar, instead of trying to stick with what WILL be phased out eventually.

Is HD support absolutely essential to the future? No. But is Nintendo making an idiotic decision by choosing to release yet another system with inferior data storage and video capabilities? Why yes, they are.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Feb 23, 2002
Messages
1,148
Best answers
0
SailorAlea said:
All the developers have a choice to make their games in HD with XB-360 and PS3, but no choice with the Revolution.
I'm not so sure about the ps3, but I know that all games for the xbox360 MUST be in high-def. Microsoft is forcing developers to have games to have at least 720p support.

Anyways, I do think it's kinda silly that Nintendo isn't using high-def, but for all we know they may be some really good reason for it, since they haven't really said anything about the revolution as of yet.

Even so, i'm still gonna be getting one, and even though it wont technically have high-def (720p and up), it will still have 480p. And last time i checked, that's still really pretty
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
674
Best answers
0
The thing to remember is that this is Pro-Nintendo propoganda, of course they're going to read things to support the great red plumber. (Of course both Sony and Microsoft have also down right lied in their publicity. Let's be fair, none of them are terribly honest.)

Still the point of HD not being common place for the next 5 years is valid, if not likely. I don't know about you guys but I play games in my bedroom on a small tv. On special occasions I'll set it up in the living room but I tend to be booted out of there within a day or two. So while there might come a day when I play HD games in my bedroom, that day isn't soon coming.

So if Nintendo think they can keep the price of the console down by not making HD games, I'm all for it. I'm a student gamer and I can't afford to pay over 150 pounds for just about anything - even a console.

I'm not so sure about teh ps3, but I know that all games for the xbox360 MUST be in high-def. Microsoft is forcing developers to have games in at least 720p support.
Wait, are you saying that the 360 won't play on normal TVs? o_O
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Feb 23, 2002
Messages
1,148
Best answers
0
Engar said:
Wait, are you saying that the 360 won't play on normal TVs? o_O
Don't worry, it will still play on normal tv's. It will automatically go back to the normal resolution through the older wires and tv connection. You'll just have the black bars running along the top and bottom like a widescreen movie.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
What's all this crap about HD-enabled games taking up more space on storage media? Or did I somehow misunderstand something?

Isn't it just like upping the resolution on a PC game? No difference, just sharper images?
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
1,478
Best answers
0
Well, the FCC decided awhile ago that all TV broadcasts have to become HD-class by some year--I think it's 2007? I think around that time, when all channels are HD, people will start buying more. Especially since HD TVs are becoming cheaper every year.

Plus, a large segment of the gaming population (my age coincidentally) that were raised on the original Nintendo/Master system/etc and worked up with age are getting out of college in the next year/two years, and will be (supposedly) pulling in their own money. Disposable income for a generation of gamers can't be bad for the HD 'revolution.' :p

Edit: Turns out they said all broadcasts must be digital by 2007, not necessarily HD. This goes for TVs, too.

Second edit:
Shiyojin Rommyu said:

Isn't it just like upping the resolution on a PC game? No difference, just sharper images?
A 1024x768 image takes up more space than a 640x480 image. More pixels means more data stored.
 

Eon

TeeHee
Banned
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
5,341
Best answers
0
Meh, sif HD, I'm still getting a revolution either way. :eek:
 
New Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
442
Best answers
0
Im getting a Revolution and im glad it wont support HDTV. I dont have one and not getting one since my old TV still works fine.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
I don't really see how this matters. If I had a buck for every article that's come out the last five years explaining why Nintendo is somehow 'smart' for doing something primitive and unrevolutionary I'd have about 7,000 spare bucks in my pocket.

HD for me is a minor thing. TV life is long; I know people who have ten year old TVs that aren't showing any signs of 'dying' anytime soon, and let's face facts--that's when people buy new TVs, moreso than when new technology becomes available.

As for the Revolution itself, this is just another mark against it as far as I'm concerned. Personally I'm pretty tired of Nintendo-biased articles trying to defend incompetent decisions, and though this isn't really a crippling or bad decision, it's just one more thing the opposition has executed in flexible and well-laid fashion that Nintendo lacks.

S.S.D.D., really. I just wish people wouldn't write these articles to try and defend these decisions as though they are made for benevolent or intelligent reasons; the simple fact is Nintendo is behind the times and behind the gun as well as behind the 8 ball.

Either way, maybe for the Crapolution rendering something in HD is a crippling memory hogging process...but the PS3 is like, several dozen times stronger than the Crapolution, and the 360 obviously will have its technological bases covered for memory and video requirements as well. It's really not even that much of a huge gap for these monstrous machines, though apparently it is for the Revolution.

Not wanting to support HD at all is their own funeral at any rate. As time goes on and we start to lean more towards HD games (probably a couple years after these consoles release), developers are just plain not going to have a choice if they want to do a hi-res game.

And perhaps, finally, this aged abomination will realize it is dead, and Sega will at last return to glory after taking out a 10 dollar loan from a friend and purchasing the bloated corpse of Nintendo and actually start making some intelligent decisions. But only time will tell.

As far as I see it--the first of many very obvious pitfalls that are going to cripple Nintendo in the upcoming Console War 2.0. 'Nuff said.
 
The Sinister Minister
Retired Forum Staff
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
3,637
Best answers
0
Magus said:
Meh, sif HD, I'm still getting a revolution either way. :eek:
Agreed. As I don't have an HDTV and only 2 years ago got a new TV, I could care less if Revolution will support HD. I'll get it either way.

I have yet to be even remotely disappointed with a Nintendo console, and I don't see any reason to dislike this one. I'll buy it regardless of HD compatibility, as I will Sony's next console. I buy consoles for the games, not the specs (Yes, graphics amount to almost nothing for me no matter how you slice the issue).
 
Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
1,197
Best answers
0
same here, even if HD TV prices are dropping Alea, that doesnt change the fact that they are still expensive.

as long as i can play a game on my TV, whether it be a plasma screen tv or 14" LCD screen, i aint fussed, wont change my opinion of a game, or how much i will play it.
 
Live free or die by the sword
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
7,416
Best answers
0
SaiyanPrideXIX said:
Either way, maybe for the Crapolution rendering something in HD is a crippling memory hogging process...but the PS3 is like, several dozen times stronger than the Crapolution, and the 360 obviously will have its technological bases covered for memory and video requirements as well. It's really not even that much of a huge gap for these monstrous machines, though apparently it is for the Revolution.
Sorry son, I'm going to have to call your bull**** and give you a ticket for the short bus. Have you seen the revolution specs? No? Thought not. You can't make claims about processing power untill all the cards are down. Frankly, alot of the newer console specs are bull****.

You buy a console to do console things, multi proc wont do much for gaming.

Incedentally, the PS3 has chosen again to go half the ram of the Xbox, another stupid design decision that you can't possibly argue is a good idea. Less ram for the loose. Don't forget that the PS3 will be backwards compatable, but you have to jump through loops to get your old games on the new memory cards. Oh yeah, bad HDD support, again? You betcha.

I'm not a N fanboy, I have some of their consoles, and they work great for the games I wanted on them. I will likley buy a PS3 first, since it is the console I like the most, DESPITE ITS GLARING FLAWS. What matters at the end of the day is whether or not I had fun playing it. If you're worried about 720p, FULL HDD support, non-asinine graphic ram decisions and decent architecture, you missed the point to begin with.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
The Pickled One said:
I'm not a N fanboy, I have some of their consoles, and they work great for the games I wanted on them. I will likley buy a PS3 first, since it is the console I like the most, DESPITE ITS GLARING FLAWS. What matters at the end of the day is whether or not I had fun playing it. If you're worried about 720p, FULL HDD support, non-asinine graphic ram decisions and decent architecture, you missed the point to begin with.
I suppose you're right, particularly on that last mark, but when you're coming from my perspective it might make a little more sense.

At the end of the day, I don't consider the flaws of the other consoles nearly as obvious or asinine as Nintendo. For me it's all about flexibility; I don't care about HDTV support either way, or Ram, or any of that crap, but I think from a developer's standpoint they'd like the options. ESF is a perfect example of that--stuck ont he Half Life engine, the dev team hits limits constantly that ruin or severely compromise their vision of what they game was originally intended as.

That aside, I don't even really care about the Revolution specs, Cuc. Yeah, I haven't seen them. You know why I haven't seen them? Because the other machines blew it out of the water so bad that revealing their own specs was too much of a suicide dive at E3. In fact, I wager they will be pulling a throwback to the Dreamcast days where they let the other big machines come up, analyze what they did, and copy it...badly.

I can argue the Ram thing, but it's not worth really getting into. If the PS3's visual processor doesn't need a gig of ram for overhead...why put a gig of ram in the damn thing? Microsoft's graphics tech in the 360 (lamest name ever, by the way) is not as powerful as the PS3's, so it stands to reason that the 360 would want more ram for overhead than the PS3 would.

Nintendo simply does not have the resources to do the kind of development Sony and Microsoft can. Nintendo is not a technologically savvy company, and that will be its undoing. Come on, these are people who had to put out a Ram pack for the 64 to get a game to play properly. They haven't the slightest idea how to create a machine that is top tier technologically, because that simply isn't their thing.

There are other things to consider as well; for example, the fact that the company is in the financial ****ter. They can't afford things like online server maintenance, and if you think for one second that you won't be paying for your old games YET A FIFTH TIME to play them on the Revolution, think again. I guaran-damn-tee you will be paying for that, because there is money to be made and they need a massive profit margin. You will also be paying for that Hard Drive everyone's so hard up about, too; if not, you'll be paying for an add-on for it because the default one will probably suck or have piddlesome storage.

This is of course all irrelevant because they will continue to market for grade schoolers in order to avoid having to directly deal with Microsoft and Sony's ownage of the industry. Which means that it doesn't matter how strong the machine is; 9/10s of the games are going to look like a ****ing coloring book anyway.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
1,392
Best answers
0
SaiyanPrideXIX said:
I suppose you're right, particularly on that last mark, but when you're coming from my perspective it might make a little more sense.

At the end of the day, I don't consider the flaws of the other consoles nearly as obvious or asinine as Nintendo. For me it's all about flexibility; I don't care about HDTV support either way, or Ram, or any of that crap, but I think from a developer's standpoint they'd like the options. ESF is a perfect example of that--stuck ont he Half Life engine, the dev team hits limits constantly that ruin or severely compromise their vision of what they game was originally intended as.

That aside, I don't even really care about the Revolution specs, Cuc. Yeah, I haven't seen them. You know why I haven't seen them? Because the other machines blew it out of the water so bad that revealing their own specs was too much of a suicide dive at E3. In fact, I wager they will be pulling a throwback to the Dreamcast days where they let the other big machines come up, analyze what they did, and copy it...badly.

I can argue the Ram thing, but it's not worth really getting into. If the PS3's visual processor doesn't need a gig of ram for overhead...why put a gig of ram in the damn thing? Microsoft's graphics tech in the 360 (lamest name ever, by the way) is not as powerful as the PS3's, so it stands to reason that the 360 would want more ram for overhead than the PS3 would.

Nintendo simply does not have the resources to do the kind of development Sony and Microsoft can. Nintendo is not a technologically savvy company, and that will be its undoing. Come on, these are people who had to put out a Ram pack for the 64 to get a game to play properly. They haven't the slightest idea how to create a machine that is top tier technologically, because that simply isn't their thing.

There are other things to consider as well; for example, the fact that the company is in the financial ****ter. They can't afford things like online server maintenance, and if you think for one second that you won't be paying for your old games YET A FIFTH TIME to play them on the Revolution, think again. I guaran-damn-tee you will be paying for that, because there is money to be made and they need a massive profit margin. You will also be paying for that Hard Drive everyone's so hard up about, too; if not, you'll be paying for an add-on for it because the default one will probably suck or have piddlesome storage.

This is of course all irrelevant because they will continue to market for grade schoolers in order to avoid having to directly deal with Microsoft and Sony's ownage of the industry. Which means that it doesn't matter how strong the machine is; 9/10s of the games are going to look like a ****ing coloring book anyway.

Sounds to me you're being anti-nintendo. Nintendo has the ability to be just as advanced as Microsoft and Sony. They just choose not to. Its like having the ability to eat one more scoop of chocolate ice cream after eating 3 already. You COULD do it, but you might not want to.

You say you dont care about specs because Sony and Microsoft blew it out of the water? Thats very biased. Nintendo is not showing their specs for a reason. Nintendo Revolution is going to be the last next Gen to be released. Microsoft waited about 6 months before its release to release specs. Sony waited about 9 months since its assumed to be released in spring 2006. Nintendo has over a year left.

THE REVOLUTION IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT

So Nintendo not releasing specs doesn't mean its scared of the reaction. It just means that its not ready yet. Once Nintendo finishes the prototype revolution and shows screenshots of what it can do, THEN it will release specs. So don't bother trying to act like Nintendo is scared of the competition. Nintendo is simply taking its time.

Oh...and Nintendo isn't financially in trouble. Sony is. get your facts straight. Its common knowledge.

Yeah. And they ARE making you pay to download those games. Sure...not many people are all too happy about it, but it makes sense. Its their games. NES to N64. Those games are still being bought for a profit. Thats why you still see used N64 games in common game stores. If they became free downloads, then all of those games would become useless. Get a revolution and people will just throw away the NES, SNES, and N64 because they will literally become useless. Thats not smart business. So you can either play the classic games on your old systems, or download them for a cheap price (it'll be about $5-$10 a game or so) and play it on the revolution.

Furthermore, their online will be free WiFi. They don't NEED to pay for server maintanence. It'll be worked on for free. Be glad we're not paying a monthly/yearly fee to play online. Its a blessing that you're making out to be a tragedy.

And last but not least.....this comment....

This is of course all irrelevant because they will continue to market for grade schoolers in order to avoid having to directly deal with Microsoft and Sony's ownage of the industry. Which means that it doesn't matter how strong the machine is; 9/10s of the games are going to look like a ****ing coloring book anyway.
That was so incredibly anti-nintendo that I just have to laugh. Funny. One Zelda game gets cel-shaded graphics and everyone calls it a kiddy system.

Thats right. Ignore the NES, SNES, and N64. Just focus on the gamecube. Ignore Resident Evil, Goldeneye, and all these other serious games everyone loved. Just focus on Mario Party and Wind Waker. Ignore everything that Nintendo is good for and focus on everything bad about it.

Big man now, aren't you?

I'm a Sony fan...but good god...that comment was wrong on so many levels, man.

Some of us seem to forget we grew up on Mario and Zelda. Now, its only cool to like M rated games. Unless you like Halo or GTA, then the games you play are Kiddy games. The gaming industry as a whole is falling apart. Not because of the systems. No no. Its because of the players and their elitist attitude toward games and their systems.

Oh...and before I leave, I have one thing left to say...

Super Smash Bros. Revolution Online is going to make Nintendo Revolution sales higher than any other Next gen system. Why? Because, dispite it being on a "Kiddy System" as you so harshly claim....Smash Bros. is....and will forever remain, the most popular multiplayer console game. And it going online will destroy any online game any of us have ever seen. And why do I say this? Because no matter where you look...no matter how high you climb...you will never find anyone, both owners of a gamecube or not, who dislikes Smash Bros.

thank you...and goodnight.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top