Yesterday, IGN released some technical specs about the revolution. And at first glance, it looks like Nintendo lost its marbles - less than 128 MB of RAM (less than a quarter of the XBOX 360 and presumably the PS3), only 1.5 to twice as fast as the old GameCube (much less horsepower than 360 and PS3).
So what is Nintendo thinking?
Obviously, I can only speculate, but they’ve made it pretty clear that they don’t believe in horsepower . According to them, the casual gamers don’t care. And I’m more than willing to agree.
Good games are rarely defined by their graphics. One of the more recent examples is “Gun”
And Nintendo is not only wildly guessing - the Nintendo DS
Clearly, their thrust is not the hardcore gamer - Nintendo is aiming to broaden the market instead. Combine that with a potential price tag of $149, or even $99, and the big N has a good chance of mixing it up. If their console is less than half the price of the competitors, that’s a huge point right there. Add to that that they’re not aiming for HDTV, and another chunk of money saved.
Second, look at the controller. It is simplified so that it appeals to people who get scared by the complexity of current controllers. (I mean, really - 10 buttons, two analag sticks, a digital pad - powerful enough to control military hardware). It is also very different - you can just play games by waving it around. And the recent crop of alternate controllers shows that there is clear interest in this.
From this vantage point, it looks like Nintendo is set to leave the hardcore gamers (who are happy to just buy Madden 2007, Doom 15 and various other sequels) behind to open up the market to a completely different audience. And they plan to keep development costs low enough so developers don’t have to break the bank and can afford to experiment a bit. It’s a huge gamble - but there’s a fair chance Nintendo might pull it of.
It’s definitely the first Next-Gen console I will get.
Technorati Tags:Nintendo Revolution Game Industry
Cunning, for several reasons:
1) The Revolution is obviously designed with market research on both gamers and the people who buy the systems in mind. Consider for a moment that much you have to pay extortionate prices for on the XBox 360 (such as Wi-Fi and a proprietary hard drive), and then consider the Revolution…which has free Wi-Fi and saves downloads on CF cards. Also consider the sizes of the system; the Xbox 360 and PS3 are beasts, practically computers from 1995 in size (and it must be said, the PS3 design is really, really ugly. I bet if you scrape away the silver paint there’s biege plastic under there.) The Revolution is tiny (i.e. easy to hide) and has a nice, sleek design.
Or there’s the online component. I remain skeptical that Nintendo will keep first-party Internet play free, despite their commitment to hotspots and wireless play on the DS. But I would lay down money that it’s going to cost far less than XBox Live or Sony’s online network and that likely in most games it’s going to be far better integrated.
Then, of course, there’s system cost. The Xbox 360 is a de-facto $400, and the PS3 is apparently going to be between $450 and $500 for a decent package. The Revolution is apparently at a price point of $200. And, unlike Sony or Microsoft, Nintendo actually makes a profit on the systems it sells. So if they get a sales edge, they can cut the Revolution’s price and watch the competitors squirm.
2) The Xbox 360 and the PS3 are not about games and never were (as, frankly, is amply demonstrated by the failure of both to start strong in-house franchises.) Both Sony and Microsoft see this system as a backdoor to introducing the appliance computer and getting a grip on the market (and to be fair to Microsoft, I’ll give them some praise for thinking this far ahead.) The PS3 is particularly crucial because if it doesn’t sell well, that’s going to have nasty ramifications all up and down the Sony product line. Nintendo, on the other hand, is a toy company with no investment in pushing a product line beyond systems and games.
3) Nintendo has the games. Metroid, Mario, and Zelda alone are enough to secure a solid fanbase, but I’ve got my fingers crossed that lesser franchises like Killer Instinct and Eternal Darkness will return. Sony has, what, GTA (which isn’t even an exclusive) and XBox has Halo. Not exactly a killer lineup. Combine that with the fact that Nintendo seems to have done a complete 180 on independent development and that they’re putting a big chunk of their older games out there for download (I fully expect my first $50 spent on games won’t be games designed for the Revolution), and that’s a hard row for the other competitors to hoe.
Of course, in the world of video games, hype counts for everything, so we’ll see how it goes.
They’ll make their money like they always do.
They’ve essentially conceded the high-end console market to Sony and Microsoft.
I would like to point out that the iPod shuffle has more memory than the Revolution.