Speaking of gaming communities.

taeric

Flaccid Member
May 6, 2005
1,369
0
0
45
Marklar
₥0
So, evidently Nintendo has said that they will be the cheapest of the next generation consoles. They have also said that they will not be supporting HD.

For myself, cheaper sounds good. The no HD support seems brave. Especially since that appears to be a big selling point for the 360 and the PS3. I don't know any numbers to show how many people are in a position to really care. I know all of 3 people with HDTVs. Maybe 4. Still, the whole argument that people care more about gameplay than flashy graphics seems weak to me.

Anyway, thoughts?
 
ChikkenNoodul said:
Smooth high-res graphics are important to people like my wife, who gets nauseous with anything on the PS2 other than a strict RPG, yet is okay with seeing Halo 2 on the X-Box.
your wife games :drool:
 
b_sinning said:
Buying a gaming system for $400 is a bit much.

Meh. Buying a computer for the same price (or more) is just as pointless for most people.

And, honestly, I paid 300 for the PS2 when it came out. I've used it countless times since then. It is still my main DVD player. So, over the lifetime of the system, it has been well worth the cost.
 
taeric said:
Meh. Buying a computer for the same price (or more) is just as pointless for most people.

And, honestly, I paid 300 for the PS2 when it came out. I've used it countless times since then. It is still my main DVD player. So, over the lifetime of the system, it has been well worth the cost.

Yeah, it really depends on the person and what type of gaming experience they prefer.
 
taeric said:
Meh. Buying a computer for the same price (or more) is just as pointless for most people.

And, honestly, I paid 300 for the PS2 when it came out. I've used it countless times since then. It is still my main DVD player. So, over the lifetime of the system, it has been well worth the cost.

Yeah, you're not going to have much of a gaming rig for $400. On the other hand, $400 for a console is also a little much, but I guess the extra cost is for instant gratification.
 
i don't think it'll be that big of an issue. HD is still a big divider for the haves and have nots, and the lower price will cater to both sides of that line. game cube has provided beautiful graphics for many of their games, so i don't think the lack of hd will be a problem for the revolution
 
F33nX said:
i don't think it'll be that big of an issue. HD is still a big divider for the haves and have nots, and the lower price will cater to both sides of that line. game cube has provided beautiful graphics for many of their games, so i don't think the lack of hd will be a problem for the revolution

yeah, what she said :)
 
itburnswhenipee said:
Yeah, you're not going to have much of a gaming rig for $400. On the other hand, $400 for a console is also a little much, but I guess the extra cost is for instant gratification.

I didn't even mean for a gaming rig. I meant simply a computer that most people will use as a thin client to check email and chat with friends. Occasionally people will write documents and such. The people that do that the most, though, have a computer at work that they can use.

Add this in to the whole goal of Sony and MS looking to get into broader markets with the new systems, and it is not much of a stretch to see computers getting replaced in many uses by the consoles. I think all it would take is a decent browser and for the most part people won't need a computer in addition to the "gaming" console.
 
F33nX said:
i don't think it'll be that big of an issue. HD is still a big divider for the haves and have nots, and the lower price will cater to both sides of that line. game cube has provided beautiful graphics for many of their games, so i don't think the lack of hd will be a problem for the revolution

This is where I just don't know enough about the market, honestly. I do think that most anyone looking to get themselves a gaming console will also be looking to get an HDTV soon. Those who are getting their children consoles will not have this as a concern, of course.
 
They realized that the vast majority of people, dispite what they tell you are not going to use it. Face it. Geeks, the people who will use it are a very small group. As the Xbox 360 demos that are out will tell you most people are going to hook it up incorrectly or not put it in the right mode which will either be a PR disaster or people not getting the full benefits. Either that or it will be a rarely used feature because of resources.

Im willing to go on the line to say that HD will be like Online is on the current systems, used by less than half the users.
 
Ryokurin said:
They realized that the vast majority of people, dispite what they tell you are not going to use it. Face it. Geeks, the people who will use it are a very small group. As the Xbox 360 demos that are out will tell you most people are going to hook it up incorrectly or not put it in the right mode which will either be a PR disaster or people not getting the full benefits. Either that or it will be a rarely used feature because of resources.

Im willing to go on the line to say that HD will be like Online is on the current systems, used by less than half the users.

While I do agree with you to an extent, it is still a relatively weak argument. Especially since online is now all the rage.

The really dangerous game they are going with here, is if MS and Sony put the stats on the box. "We have x% more on the screen than Nintendo" will not look to good for them. Especially with how ill informed most consumers really are.

Also, I think you underestimate the other group that will use it. Sports fans. I probably knew more people that had HDTVs at my old job than I do now, and none of them played games.