Contents:

- Extracts from e-mails to a friend concerning the Nintendo Revolution (during 2005)
- His replies and extracts from posts that he has made on certain message boards (during 2005)
- Selected comments I have made on message boards (during 2005)

E-mail extracts are denoted by: [E-MAIL]
Extracts from posts are denoted by: [POST]

“The Revolution design is all I hoped for and more. It’s like they read my mind or something. For ages I commented on the little things that they could have done to make the GameCube better. It could have had a blue power light (black unit only) instead of orange, used better quality plastic, changed the front plate, used a slot/slide load transport for discs etc. I always defended the GC though – the black unit was small and compact, and still appealed to a lot of people design wise. The Revolution is something else. Yes, it is a black box… but a very sexy black box.

There’re already critics saying it’s a PS2 rip-off or that it resembles a door-stop. They obviously don’t like the minimal look. It only looks like a PS2 because the light behind the slot load drive is blue like the PS2 logo and it happens to be black. Other than that, how is it like a PS2? It’s smaller, has a slot load drive and wireless controllers. There’s a very neat panel for covering GC memory card slots and ports. It’s certainly no cheap design and claims of no imagination are totally incorrect. It must have taken a long time to work out where to place components and how get the mechanisms working in something that size. Let’s hope the controller is equally sleek and imaginative. Sometimes simple or minimal is the best! It looks very stylish. For nearly three years I have said black with subtle blue lighting. Here it is!

Now comes the question of power. Anyone who is anyone knows that Sony and MS exaggerate the claims of power. Two to three times the power sounds very good to me, given what I know about computer architecture. We all know Nintendo produce cleverly designed, quality hardware. They don’t just contract companies to design chips to cut their costs, oh no. They make very efficient hardware. The Revolution won’t be a PC in a box like the X-Box.

The games and originality is where it’s going to count. Looking back, you’ll notice that there have been few great changes in game design or styles of play over the past three years. So raw power isn’t necessarily the answer. The first games on any new system are good graphically but never use the systems full potential. Then comes the dip in graphics, as games pour out one by one. There will be a couple towards the end that really shine, but other than that people are left with incarnations of similar games with similar graphics.

Reading PlayStation forums it appears that a lot of people really like the design of The Revolution. Some comment as to how well a Revolution will look when put a long side their PS3. It makes me wonder how many owners of an X-Box 360 will think the same. That would mean a lot of Sony and MS fans will buy a Revolution too. Those like myself will buy a Revolution first and may only stick to the one machine. What’s my point you may be asking? Well…

If the price is right - which it will be - then lots of Revolution units will fly off the shelves. We just need the original games and new styles/ways to play. I predict the Revolution doing quite nicely. Have I said how much I love The Big N?” [E-MAIL]

"I wanted a powerful console from this current generation, but I opted for the GameCube. I have not been let down. Although Sony boasted about their Emotion Engine on the PS2, how much of it did they actually utilise? Not much is what I say. I think Nintendo are honest with their predictions on actual hardware performances for their next generation console… No way does 15 or 35 times look as it does so, on the Xbox or the PS3. They, honestly now, only look slightly better then the current Xbox graphics. And although many try not to admit it, some people sometimes only go for better graphics.

Well, to finish off, has Nintendo something well hidden with the Revolution?! Nintendo’s Revolution will be good… we know it, but don’t want to admit it." [POST]

"At E3 Nintendo said they are not in "direct competition" with either PS3 or X360, how can you remotely say the Revo is going be a piece of s***?!

X360... Someone inhaling?! Is that person holding his breathe wanting to die?! As for the PS3, funkin hell... WTF is going on with that controller?! The console itself [PS3] looks ok.

Either way, you cannot comment on a product you know very little about. We all know Nintendo are doing something different. So why are we still saying Nintendo have already lost/will lose and pull out from manufacturing consoles to produce games only?! It's all rubbish!!

Out of the three, PS3 will sell shed loads because of the brand name PLAYSTATION. The 360 will sell to those who like "reliable" software (and hardware for that matter) that doesnt crash or anything. *cough... erm Windows* It'll appeal to those who want a cheap, restricted PC (restricted to playing games, being online, able to video-chat like that similar to MSN Messenger etc). Oh sorry... Windows does crash for no apparent reason and whenever it feels like it. Oops... My bad. Nintendo are backed up by the trusty fans, some of whom are losing faith in Nintendo... but like I said, we know nothing more then Wi-Fi connectivity (online and controllers), small size (though that was a prototype we all saw and its going to get smaller), backward compatability, DVD playback, classic downloadables from NES to N64, proposed online strategy, not that much different to X360 and PS3 graphical performances, expandable flash memory and maybe more. To me, the only console that sounds interesting has to be the REVOLUTION!!

I was going to get my hands on the 360, but im not too sure anymore. My bro will most likely get the PS3 so I won't have to. That leaves me with the Revolution I guess. I know less about the Revo, which is why I'm more interested in it.

Out of all three, Nintendo has the most quantity of games already, especially when you include the "old skool" retro games... who's going to tell me they aren't going to love being able to play them yet again on their TV?! Well... Unless your NES, SNES or N64 still work and you have the games. ROMs don't feel the same when played on the PC as to playing the games on the TV. Thats my opinion." [POST]

"I was just thinking how certain individuals claim that it's Nintendo's own arrogance that has put them in the position that they are in today. By position I mean that they have an approximate market share of 15%. Firstly, this is not necessarily a bad thing given the size of the market today. Secondly, Nintendo make a profit on pretty much everything, unlike MS and Sony. Nintendo have many successful products such as the GBA SP, DS and GC - all of which make or have made a profit on their retail prices.

I disagree with those who claim that it's Nintendo's own arrogance that has put them into a position that is deemed unacceptable. Yes, I would say that on occassion Nintendo's modesty and secrecy lead to poeple assuming that it's arrogance. Why should it be wrong for a company who is often the leader in new technology and innovation to want to protect their own ideas. Furthermore, if they, and others, believe the games they develop to be the best, then why should they not be able to feel slightly better about themselves than other companies.

In the past Nintendo was accused of ruling with an iron fist when it came to third party developers. I think this reign is over and I'm very glad. Nintendo has become quite friendly with certain third party developers, which can only be a very good thing. They have put their faith in companies by allowing them to work on titles that were originally produced by in-house teams. I'm about to make a bold statement. It could be argued that Nintendo's games being so good in the past dented third party sales on their system, so much so, that 3rd parties looked elsewhere. I'm thinking all the way back to the NES and SNES era." [E-MAIL]

"To HD or not to HD?

I would also like to state that up until recently I was with Nintendo on their decision to NOT include HD support for The Revolution. It was just one small thing that made me change my mind - I'll explain later.

Firstly, I'd like to outline several points that allowed me to make my initial decision regarding HD support.

1) Europe and Japan slow on determining standards for HDTV broadcasting
2) Cost
3) Sony and MS using it to push new format rather than as a true benefit to the gamer - they are using it as a catalyst for newer tech.
4) How many HDTVs do they want people to own? Most people have a large TV in their lounge which is often being viewed by others.
5) Most gamers run consoles on smaller screens in 'secondary rooms', and as a result will want a smaller VDU.
6) Cost to developers
7) Most gamers will use smaller screens where the increased res will be less of a benefit - look at a good laptop screen and you may think diff though
8) Used only as some want better res on large screens to prevent 'blocky' graphics, as more people have huge plasma displays these days
9) Market not ready for HDTV gaming - MS and Sony relying on VG industry to boost HDTV sales
10) MS and Sony may harm the true nature of the VG industry by using it to push related technologies
11) MS and Sony are quoting raw data and have no games running in real time in 1080i res. When they do and Nintendo show new games on Rev actually running... well lets just say we won't be dissapointed
12) HDTV won't be the standard in homes for a few years - many will not be able to use HD
13) Cost of games may rise

MS and Sony are likely going to show-off their new machines with HDTV sets in stores all around the world, while Nintendo will be stuck with Revolution running next to them in SD. Your average consumer will look at the HD visuals and go "oooooh, look how pretty they are..." etc. This will not go down well for Nintendo. It is for this simple reason that I feel that the Revolution should include HD support." [POST]

"The GC really did hold its own against the X-Box. If you check out some of the levels in Rogue Leader (a launch title) you'll understand just how good the graphics could be on the GC. I played this game in 480i not 480p. I'd imagine on a good SD set in 480p that this game would look even more amazing. It must have been the filtering effects that really helped certain visual elements of this game." [POST]