This is important information
--------------------------------------
Editorial: Planet Revolution
Nintendo relies on innovation, not horsepower, to drive sales of its next generation console.
by Matt Casamassina
March 8, 2006 - I am at best a reluctant role-playing game fan and at worst somebody who just doesn't care about the genre. I tend to believe this is because the majority of RPGs fall into the fantasy category and I am by nature someone who favors science fiction. But I'll be the first to concede that it may also have something to do with my attention span, which rivals that of a hamster. I bring this point up because, despite this unavoidable truth, I am dead-set on buying The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion for Xbox 360 later this month. I'm planning to make this purchase knowing full well that I probably won't stick with the game long enough to appreciate its universe or storyline. So why buy it? My reasoning couldn't possibly be shallower: I happen to think it looks gorgeous.
I've just illustrated to you the thought process of a videogame graphics junkie, or a person so intoxicated with the visual presentation of software that it alone can make or break an effort in their eyes. You might find the notion appalling, but I'd argue that we've all been there at one time or another. We've been trained by the industry to look first and consider the gameplay mechanics second. Even the people designing some of today's biggest projects have learned that graphics can be king. Consider for a moment any recent developer interview you've read or downloaded. I'll bet that the interviewee spent ample time explaining the cutting-edge graphic techniques running in-game -- your HDR lighting, normal mapping, bumped surfaces and blistering framerate -- but did they go into the same detail about the title's storyline?
The videogame industry has for more than a decade existed primarily to deliver players bigger and better aural and visual experiences. We've gone from sprites to polygons, from 2D to 3D, from hand-drawn to motion-captured, from stereo to surround sound and from standard to high-definition graphics. Microsoft and Sony are counting on the so-called "HD era" of gaming to suck in and satisfy another generation of players. Xbox 360 is so focused on HD graphics, in fact, that Bill Gates and company barely bothered to change the design of its controller from a previous generation. As a result, the console can render games in magnificent 720p resolution, but players must still push two archaic analog sticks to move and look around in a game like Perfect Dark Zero. PC first-person shooters provided better accuracy with a mouse-and-keyboard setup a decade ago. It begs the question, is the industry so determined to paint the next pretty picture that it's become collectively distracted from true gameplay innovation?
Clearly, graphics are important, but as any addict (myself included) should know, games are ultimately designed to be played, not simply gawked over. And if a game doesn't play well, all its fancy graphics may as well be for nothing.
Graphics Aren't Everything
Nintendo has in recent years taken steps to separate itself from the audio and visual war waged by Microsoft and Sony. The company's dual-screen portable, Nintendo DS, lacks the power of Sony's PSP device, but it innovates with a touch-sensitive interface. Company president Satoru Iwata has stressed on numerous occasions that unless developers continue to innovate beyond prettier visuals the videogame industry will die. Dramatic, sure, but Nintendo has remained true to its words, usually downplaying horsepower and promoting new methods to play games.
The Big N's self-described 'new generation' console, codenamed Revolution, will not regularly output high-definition visuals, which has some graphic junkies throwing a fit. Most, if not all Revolution titles will run in standard definition with the option for progressive-scan display. Some might call this a lack of foresight. After all, more than 50 percent of households are expected to own at least one HD set by 2008, according to analysts. However, Nintendo bigwigs believe that graphics have reached a "saturation point," and that gameplay, not more detailed game worlds, is in need of a renaissance. This is an approach that I can get behind regardless of my infatuation with cutting-edge visuals in software. In fact, more and more I find myself completely aligned with this game design philosophy.
I don't believe for a second some of Nintendo's reasons for this decision, though. The house that Mario built claims that Revolution will be cheaper both for developers and consumers because it doesn't support high-definition games. The upfront development hardware is certain to be more cost effective and developers familiar with GameCube will be able to pick up where they left off, yes, but that's really about it. Just because Revolution is less powerful doesn't automatically mean that software houses working on it will make cheaper games. Shenmue was made for Dreamcast, a system significantly less powerful than GameCube, but that didn't stop SEGA from sinking millions upon millions into the project. Geometry Wars was by comparison made for relative pennies and it runs in high-definition on Xbox 360. Point is, studios can just as easily make an inexpensive game for 360 or PlayStation 3 as they can on Revolution. And therefore, Nintendo cannot hold to that.
In fact, the case can be made that in some situations Revolution development will be more expensive than making software for 360 or PS3 because Nintendo's hardware is both less powerful and reliant on a new input mechanism, which makes ports a tricky affair. Third parties oftentimes simultaneously create software for two or more systems hoping to recuperate some of the production costs and the very nature of Nintendo's new hardware makes that undertaking an improbability. As a result - and we're seeing this already - many studios are creating original content for Revolution. This is, of course, great news for the end consumer, but nevertheless a potentially pricy predicament for publishers.
Furthermore, Nintendo's allegation that most gamers won't be able to tell the difference between standard and high-definition games is a stretch, to say the least. Don't get me wrong - The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is a very pretty GameCube game, but it lacks many of the next-generation graphical bells and whistles and I think any seasoned gamer who owns an HD television will be able to see so.
Next up, IGN is saying that Trauma Center Revolution is under development for Nintendo's next-gen console. Recently, Nintendo Power has hinted at a Revolution version of the Nintendo DS game that released last year. IGN is saying they can now validate that the game is, in fact, well under development and that we should be able to play it at E3 2006.
IGN also comments on the status of already announced games for the Revolution. As far as the next Super Smash Bros. goes, they expect the game to be fully playable at this year's E3 and remain true to its predecessor while bringing new gameplay elements in, along with the confirmed online play. They still expect it to be a launch title but their outlook on Super Mario Revolution is a bit different. IGN doesn't believe it will launch with the console this year, which is strange considering Nintendo's past comments on needing to have a Mario game at launch.
Finally, they give us an update on the only Revolution game that was officially announced via press release at E3 2005, Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles. IGN believes that not only will the game show up at this year's E3, but has a good chance at launching with the system later this year. Having a Final Fantasy game at launch, while not a "true" game in the series, would be quite the boost for the console.
As always, you can expect DSR to follow up on this story as more information becomes available, right up until the Revolution's coming out party at this year's E3!
And yet, Revolution games are going to be beautiful even if they don't run in high-definition resolutions. Really, one look at the current generation of titles is enough to make the point. If games like Resident Evil 4, The Chronicles of Riddick and Black have proved anything, it's that GameCube, PlayStation 2 and Xbox are very capable consoles that can produce some truly stunning visuals. Revolution will be more capable still and I'm expecting some breathtaking graphics from some of its powerhouse games.
One thing I've learned about some of my Xbox 360 games is that while the graphics are initially impressive, you eventually take them for granted, at which point gameplay returns to its rightful place as the most important factor. I'm finding that many of my 360 games look good, but play exactly like their predecessors. Fight Night. Need for Speed. Perfect Dark Zero. Project Gotham Racing 3. Cut away the prettier visuals and you're left with games that could have been made for Xbox. The gameplay is exactly the same. And this is partly why Revolution holds so much promise. The system's unique new controller may help both reinvent old genres and create brand new ones.
The Karaoke of Videogame Consoles
I've stopped thinking about Revolution as a typical next generation console and starting thinking about it as a vehicle for an innovative new controller. Based on developer reports, the Big N's next platform is set to be about twice as powerful as a GameCube, which is a leap, but not a quantum one. Fans still holding out for something more are likely to be disappointed. Revolution's size, which is at least half that of Xbox 360, should be a giveaway. After all, where technology is concerned, size oftentimes does indeed matter. Does anybody honestly believe that Microsoft wanted Xbox 360 to be as big as it is? The bulky size of the console practically guarantees it low sales in Japan. No, it's a big system because it had to be. Revolution, in contrast, is small because it can be.
Developers and publishers alike believe that Revolution could ship this November with a very attractive price tag. Some believe it'll be $199 and others predict that it could go for as low as $149, which would put it in near impulse-buy territory. This is part of Nintendo's strategy for the machine. Small, quiet and affordable. Something that sits in the living room, but doesn't dominate it. Even the controller has been designed to look like a television remote so that it's neither out of place on a coffee table nor daunting to someone unfamiliar with videogames.
We talk about the mainstream, but videogames have barely scratched the surface of what that really means. When Halo or Grand Theft Auto sell three million copies, we say they have mainstream appeal, and yet that figure is miniscule compared to how many sales a popular DVD may garner in a single day. Or, for that matter, how many people view a hit television show. Revolution is the first console targeting the real mainstream - the elusive gamer and the hardcore. Everyone from the person who played through Eternal Darkness three times to the 60-something grandfather who may have no understanding whatsoever of a traditional videogame.
I've come to believe that in this way Revolution is the karaoke machine of videogame consoles. It's technology, yes, but it's technology for everyone, not just a select few. The thing about karaoke is that it's not flashy. Nobody would rave about its audio quality. And at the same time, nobody gives a damn. It's fun. It brings people together. And everyone - regardless of gender, age or even skill - can enjoy it on some level. Nintendo's console encapsulates all of the same ideals, except it's also got flash and, unlike karaoke, it has cool factor.
Beyond Niche
I'm still dazzled by the high-definition graphics in some next-generation titles, but I'm much more excited by the prospect of Revolution's controller and the gameplay mechanics it will nurture. I pick up games now and I wonder how they might play better on Nintendo's new console. Just this morning, I was going through a level in the first-person shooter Black - a spectacular looking title that could easily run on Nintendo's new generation console - and wondering how much more intuitive the experience would be with the Revmote, as people have taken to calling it. I'm confident that Metroid Prime 3 will show everyone how it's done. And when that inevitably happens, will seasoned gamers look upon traditional dual-analog control as a dated and clunky configuration? I think the answer is yes.
I believe that Revolution is Nintendo's most ambitious console to date and I really think the company is on to something big. Certainly the DS proves that consumers are looking for something fresh. Revolution is that and more. The hardware is slick. The games will be there. The price point is right. And, unlike GameCube, Revolution is unlike any other platform in the market. I wouldn't make the mistake of categorizing the hardware as a niche endeavor. I think it's more mainstream - true mainstream - than any other videogame system ever. If Nintendo can capitalize on that, and I'm beginning to think it just might, the little console without high-definition graphics may be the system that everybody wants.
Source:
IGN Revolution