I just think the revolution controller will either make or break nintendo... it might have a few games that it will be fun on but they will probably be some gay a** asian game and i ****ing hate that bulls***!

I'm very skeptical of the new controller, but hey I haven't tried it yet. It may be the best controller yet (I kinda doubt it though), why don't they just bring back the power-glove ;-)

Ok, we can all bash each and every console in some way, I am sure of it.

And if we try hard enough we probably could find where they differentiate from each other. In fact we could even probably point out where/how one is better than the other.

BUT...make no mistake. EVERY console maker wants to be Nintendo when they grow up some day! MS and Sony are trying to one up each other on their consoles every time they build a new one. But NEITHER of them have achieved the game dedication that Nintendo has, and might not ever achieve it. Not for lack of trying, and not for lack of capability. Sometimes you just can't beat the guy that was there first! Plain and simple!

Mario, Pokemon, etc. All you can say is WOW! The public dedication to those two games is ASTONISHING to say the least! Try as you might, and being honest with yourself....no other console/game has the dedication by the public that those two have! Not yet anyway!

What other portable console competes with the Gameboy Advance/SP? NOBODY! Who is trying to compete with the Gameboy? NOBODY! (and please don't say Sony with the PSP! I own one, and I LOVE it, and it BLOWS the Gameboy away for me...but my kids have GB SP's and they like my PSP for a change but the ALWAYS go back to their GB's!).

Nintendo has their market...make no mistake. And unless they flat out fall on their face...They will NEVER lose it!

Just my 2C!

God Bless!

i hate nintendo

That's no suprise.

This sounds good for Nintendo if what they say in the article is true.

Nintendo will appeal to kids for all forseen future. Nintendo;however, has finally placed the last nail in their coffin with this "revolutionary" controller. It's an excellent concept. I simply don't believe it won't lag or respond fluidly. I'd love to try it, but I'd probably have a sore arm within an hour. They should have a backup conventional controller.

And no HDTV support!? Maybe to a kid that's not important, until they see their big brother playing a 360 or ps3 on their HDTV in their living room. About half of the American households will have an HDTV by 2007. Kids love fun games, but "pretty" images also greatly appeal to them. They've finally sealed their fate.

Too bad giant corporations had to take over, huh?

They have not confirmed or denied whether or not the Rev will have HDTV support or not. The tech specs of the system are largely unknown.

Im still playing my dreamcast and that won't be changing anytime soon.

I can't wait for the revolution, both xbox and ps3 are missing something that is very much needed....
Mario (aka - family entertainment) and that is waht i want. After all playing HALO2 with a kid, isn't half as much fun as mario party ;)

my colecovision pwnz joor intellivision!!1

My intellivisions Atari adapter will have you crying for such power!

Actually the Colecovision had an Atari adapter first. Atari sued them and lost so everyone else was able to make one too. :D

Coleco also had the Adam which was much better than the keyboard / basic cart that Intellivision had.

I'm a huge old game fan. I'm currently working on refurbing an old 5200. (Replacing flex circuits in the controller with Rev-9, cleaning the systems up, buffing the contacts etc.)

Now what some of us in this conversation fail to realize is that Microsoft is taking steps to make more involving games? Not all of them are innovative (we can’t all be like Nintendo), but many of them will be of great quality. They have recruited and creating developers like BioWare, Mistwalker, MS Game Studios, Bethesda Softworks, and Silicon Knights. I don’t expect them to stop producing the canned games that sell, but at least they are trying to bring more than what they brought on the first console, besides the online experience that Sony failed to bring to all of its games (Don’t include FF).

Here we go again with battle of the systems, can't we all just enjoy games for what they are now?..yes, I'm waiting for PS3 to come out and I am also waiting for Revolution. I tease my friends about Xbox360 just for da hell of it cuz they claim is superior. Guys...enjoy the video games for what it is meant for no matter which system you have, ten years from now some..X company will make some X console and we're all going to look back at Xbox and Playstation Consoles as we look now at genesis and Supernintendo.

Peace out and don't hate!

And that is why Nintendo will continue to shape the market. They make games that people will play even if they don't like games. Just this X-Mas a friend of mine persuaded her mother to buy and play a Gamecube. Her mother is dead set against games because of violence, but even after that myth of debugged she refused to play because she thought that the controls were too complex for her to enjoy playing the game. The mother tried my Xbox, and she research the PS2, but in the end she found that the Gamecube suited more for involving people like her, people who were not really into games. Now I'm not saying that this is true for everyone, but I am saying why shouldn’t there be a company be out there to make games for new comers while still satisfying hardcore and moderate gamers.

I agree xbox overpriced, but not PS3(whatever they wish to charge will be ok in this instance): tests have shown its processor rendering an image instaneously at 30 fps, while the fastest Intel on the market took a whopping 2+ minutes. It's because of that Cell processor and Linux being ported to it that I give Linux a fighting chance to take over one day. BTW Sun has a similar processor Niagara--and a replacement for the pc bus allowing scores of processors and ram modules to be addressed-- so a slight chance there too,,,,

How can you possibly make that judgement when you have yet to actually see what the PS3 can do in your own home. I would have to say the opposite, and that I think the PS3 will be overprice by including features that many will never use, but must still pay for.

"PS3(whatever they wish to charge will be ok in this instance): tests have shown its processor rendering an image instaneously at 30 fps, while the fastest Intel on the market took a whopping 2+ minutes"

LOL!!! Marketers LOVE people like you!

I bet sony can convince you to jump off of a bridge. :)

Nintendo has always been and always will be a kiddy toy. They don't even allow blood in their games for Christ sake, they even go so far as to replace blood with sweat, and they are trying to say their system is aimed at people over 35? Ridicules. The Xbox is aimed at older people (other than children). I don't know about the PS2 because I don't play it but I'm guessing it would be somewhere between the two. And developing games is labor-intensive for the PS3, not the Xbox 360.

What is this about Nintendo being kiddy? I guess you don't recall that Resident Evil 4, a really gory, really good adult game, that came out for the Gamecube first. Yes I do agree that Nintendo did focus more on games rated E-T but, that doesn't mean it the only games they made were tailored to younger kids, their party games. I have no problem with Nintendo making games that adults will like as well as kids, as long as they do what they slacked on doing this generation, making mature games for adults without children of the age 18-30.

Kompressor,

No. Bad Kompressor. It's not up to Nintendo on what can be included in third party games. Example: Resident Evil 4, which was actually supported strongly by Nintendo, but made by Capcom. And surprisingly, the user base of Nintendo is older than 25 because most adults are mature enough to buy a game based on quality rather than the amount of gore being presented. It's sad that 'TEENAGERS' don't understand that.

Second, you're wrong again. It's expensive to make games for the X-Box 360, it's be stated before and consumers will see prices fluxuate on games. All in all, I don't see anything wrong with advancing technology increasing the price range for better graphical power. But Nintendo will take a different angle that consumers desperately need. All consoles fit a different gamer which is why all three companies will survive the next console war.

Nintendo's "Below $300" Price tag will be their sucess, I'm sure graphics and gameplay won't be as nice as the X360 or PS3. But Nintendo still appeals highley to younger and female gamers. The Gamecube sales were 70% Gamers under the age of 12, the rest where females of all ages. Nintendo Games catch the eyes of that group. Nintendo has been around for years and will continue to thrive in it's own market. The Sony and Microsoft don't even look to Nintendo as competition because they are in a tottaly different market. Sony and Microsoft mainly aim to get the 13+ Age group. Dominatly males. Just look at the game titles. Most of them are rated T or higher, where as most Nintendo titles are rated E.

Also parents would rather have their 6 year old using a Nintendo than a PS3 or X360. Nintendo has been known to make a strong console able to take a beating. I know if I had a 6 year old, I'd rather spend $300 than $700 on a console he might destroy...

((The Gamecube sales were 70% Gamers under the age of 12, the rest where females of all ages. Nintendo Games catch the eyes of that group.)) Maniakmx3, I have to ask you where you pulled that statistic out of-- all of the GameCube owners I know, including myself, fall into the 18+ male demographic. Also, your point on "most Nintendo games are rated E" is a complete fallacy-- if anything, most games in general are rated Teen. Among my own collection (and I am by no means someone who buys my games based on violent or graphic content) of 14 GameCube games, I counted 9 Teen Ratings, 3 Mature Ratings, and 2 Everyone Ratings.

Anyways, on topic, personally, I'll be buying a Revolution, keeping my PS2, and completely passing on the XBox360 and PS3. As someone who's been playing videogames all his life, I've been spoiled on the originality of games on early 8 and 16-bit systems. As it's come to be, the X360 and PS3 will continue to produce what sells most-- cookie cutter racing games, sports games, sequels to current high-selling franchises (More Grand Theft Auto or Devil May Cry anyone?)-- whereas the Revolution will encourage developers to think of new ways to play games, and new games entirely. Viva la Revolution.

And naturally, you ARE the entire world. We bow before you, god!

Seriously though, according to Nintendo.com, 1461/2126 games are rated E for everyone.
Edit: 264/539 for the GameCube.

Just because your group of friends are all 18+ males doesn't mean that the entire world is that way. Even if you're 100% correct for North America, there's many other countries in this world where you could be 100% incorrect. Also, quantity != quality. Even though maniakmx3 is actually correct, you must wonder how good some of those E or T games are. There's probably only two or three dozen really popular ones.

My mother has already stated that if she gets another console, it'd be another Nintendo one so she can play Mario Party. :P

True, I agree that both Sony and Microsoft will be making what sells, but I have found that throughout the life of the PS2, and don't get me started on how inferior and half built the system way, it has just poured into the industry a vast variety of games. Many were (("cookie cutter racing games, sports games, sequels to current high-selling franchises")), but it also add such great new games such as Kingdom Hearts, Shadow of the Colossus, ICO (although older), and other great games. I think that Sony will continue to allow such games to be made, but I will not argue, in fact I will agree that no other company in the console gaming industry allow as much innovation and creativity as Nintendo.

"He pointed to the Xbox 360's high startup cost as an example where the average consumer would need to spend about $700 to fully experience the system, not including an HDTV."

gee my 399 for the console and 59 for a game puts me at 458 ... wonder what the 242 i'm missing is.

the more i hear about the revolution the more i feel like nintendo is ringing its own death knell

He's referring to all the optional peripheral goodies you can get for XBox 360. You can easily spend more than $242/USD actually, even without a TV. The implication being that Nintendo intends to bundle some (or all?) of that cache of goodies into the $300 base price. We'll see if they deliver. At this point, it's all talk.

he's overexaggerating his point though. my point is 458 got me the whole experience for the 360.

sounds like 350 is going to get me the whole experience for the revolution.

the hdtv cost is really irrelevant since all three systems are going to look better in hd.

Except he's***ing that it won't be necessary. IE they're focusing more on type of games, storyline, features, etc. rather than "LOOKS GOOD ON $3000 HDTV!"

I think that's good. I mean, if you want graphical quality, you build your own computer.

Has the 360 even matched the graphical capabilities of a custom-built computer? I don't think so.

But isn't the standard soon to be HDTV? Won't that leave Nintendo already behind when they are sure to realize the this upgrade is coming? Plus, I already bought an HDTV because 360 and PS3 are going to utilize it. I'm sure that most people who can afford such an upgrade would do so on this basis, making it obvious that Nintendo should just jump on the bandwagon. I'm actually disappointed that Nintendo won't utilize new technology.

Can you build a custom built computer with graphics far superior to the 360 with a pricetag of less than $400?

I never said that they wouldn't utilize it. Just that it's going to be less of a selling point because unlike the other consoles, they actually realize computers still look better.

Consoles have a certain feel to them. The controller you use really aids that feel, so lets hope their controller turns out better than it looks.

No, but no computer is complete without a monitor, and no console is complete without that spiffy HDTV. So $1600 for computer, $400 for spiffy monitor, or $400 for console, $1600 for spiffy HDTV?

The choice is yours.

Just because it's cheap, doesn't mean it's any good!

C'mon, its Nintendo, I think they've more than proven that they know what they're doing. But I guess that wouldn't be apparent in the huge success of titles like Super Mario, The Legend of Zelda, and the Metroid series... nah, not at all, right? Get a clue, moron.

past performance does not indicate future success.

people are apparently willing to pay 400 for a console. i guess the question is whether people are going to pay 300 to use a bizarre and unnattural controller.

well at least there trying do do somthing different then trying to make the same thing over and over again.

Yeah sure they have...

The phenomenal success of the GameCube proves that does it???
I don't think so. They were doing their best stuff way back with the NES and SNES.
They have nothing now. They're releasing a new console months (if not years) after the ps3 and xbox360 for a knockdown price of $300.

Sure they're gonna make a profit from selling $300 consoles in a world that's broke from buying 360's, ps3's and their games.

Dumb fanboys like you, aren't gonna help Nintendo take over the world with kiddies games on an underpowered, underpriced, late released console.
You're the moron that needs to get a clue.

the gamecube wasent all that bad for the time, just poorly marketed and over priced

yeah but innovation doesn't excuse poor design.

besides the 360 did go in a different direction by tyring to be a media/gaming hub.

the revolution sounds like all it's going to do is solely play games ("First, focusing on a single-minded gaming device") ... how is that innovative?

Uh, the ps3 hasn't been released yet and the date may be slipping into the 2006 holiday season, so Nintendo could actually beat Sony to the market.

oh no making a game system that just plays games man i hope they go out odf business. sorry but i'd rather that then a console that is just a PC if I wanted that i Just buy a computer. and what is wrong with simple game Nothing! i'd rather that then a 20 hor game that just makes you shoot people or have sex with them. even though i do like those game i really would like to see some simpler games come out too like how warioware is

True, but I don't think Nintendo is going to repeat the past mistakes that they made with the revolution.

((Unnatuural)), pick up your remote. Tell me how unnatural that feels. Or better yet, think about how Sony adopted the analog after Nintendo used it on the 64, and how now it is as standard as at least two shoulder buttons. Then you can say it is unnatural. Innovative, yes, ambitious, yes, good for a industry that is getting complacent, yes, but certainly the evolution of the gaming controller is anything but unnatural, especially when it comes from a company that has already contributed so much in that area, not to mention in the history of gaming. Come on.

*Clears throat and takes really deep breath* First, I do agree that with the first Xbox Microsoft was bring something new and innovative to the industry, and they are improving on that idea like only they can. The thing I don't agree with it the comment on poor design.
Second, ("focusing on a single-minded gaming device") can be innovative; if in focusing you design new concepts in game design that other companies are too busy worrying about other complications to think of. Take what Nintendo is doing with the DS for instance. They are using new devices to bring an unfamiliar-yet thrilling concept to handheld games.
Lastly, just because they did come up with the hub, that doesn't mean that the 360 isn't doing anything that they couldn't do with the original Xbox. Really the only thing that they gained was graphics, and not too much of that. Before there during the 2-D era when Sony introduced the Playstation it was a dramatic change, a change in Dimension of play. This allowed Sony to get away with making a product that could have been at least 2 times better. Now years later, Microsoft wants to do what Sony did and release a newer system when the first hasn't even run its full life. Playstation it was a dramatic change, a change in Dimension of play. This allowed Sony to get away with making a product that could have been at least 2 times better. Now years later, Microsoft wants to do what Sony did and release a newer system when the first hasn't even run its full life.

"i guess the question is whether people are going to pay 300 to use a bizarre and unnattural controller. "

**cough cough** The original Xbox controller **cough cough**

While I can see a lot of valid points in some of the talking going on here, there are now quite a few people that have had a chance to see the controller in action. Gamespot was just recently shown a tech demo where they actually played a couple of games redone with the revolution controller and they liked it.

I'll be laughing when Microsoft and Sony release their knockoffs in a couple of years.