Too bad he can't do that now. Shouldn't have sold the company, Jjones!

nintendo will own you.

"interested" is one thing, actually committing to a title for the machine is quite another.
Pretty much every developer is interested but how many studios are going to devote the mammoth time and effort in actually developing a title for a system that is clearly underpowered compared to the other consoles.

I think the MP2 demo that was thrown together showed the promise of the concept.

Well, it seemed like a reasonable comment pr0cs, until the last little bit. Whether it's underpowered or not doesn't matter, but rather how well it sells. Remember, the PS2 was the least-capable machine of this generation.

"Pretty much every developer is interested but how many studios are going to devote the mammoth time and effort in actually developing a title for a system that is coming into this generation from 3rd place."

There, ftfy.

pr0cs

mite be underpowered, but surely that must mean its easier, therfore quicker and cheaper? obvisouly u considered that before posting?

pr0cs: Well it didn't stop the endless amounts of developers to develop for the PS2 this generation, which was underpowered compared to xbox and gc.

It's gotta be the controller :)

costs and time have nothing to do with Jason Jones/Bungie doing a game for the Revolution. the fact is they're owned by MS and they'll never (as long as they're owned by MS) make a game for a console other than an Xbox/Xbox 360/Whatever the next one is

#3 -- If the Revolution has less "power" wouldn't even less effort be needed to develop for it?

Exactly Shenzou, & Neale, also pr0cs dont forget the people over at Nintendo are experts at making efficient consoles that are much more capable than there specs would leave you to believe, there is no other company out there tht is as fully capable of doing this than Nintendo.

"how many studios are going to devote the mammoth time and effort in actually developing a title for a system that is clearly underpowered compared to the other consoles."
Then why are games still being made for the GBA? Honestly some cell phones are more powerful than it right now. Why were so many games made for the PS2 when it is "clearly underpowered compared to the other consoles"?
Oh, that's right, they're both extremely popular. That's why! Your point is moot.

@ pr0cs. You do understand that rev is more attractive from a developers standpoitn right now because the dev architecture is like that of current generation, while still haveing more power.

If anything developers would like it more because it would be far les risky to work on, where as 360 development is already casting its toll on even big companies like EA

I can envision a kiddified version of Halo being made[it would have to be-it's Nintendo,after all] The little trolls can run around with slingshots and little Link swords swishing at each other.No big guns tho as it's already obvious the dumb-chuk controller can't handle the big firepower. That would be left to the pro systems [360 and PS3 of course]

Shenzou - That's because the PS2 titles sold the best out of the three. If the Revolution outsells the PS3 and 360, then it will become the development platform of choice.

Don't forget that sales of third party games have been historically lower on Nintendo systems, so the inclination to make a Revolution game is lower. According to my game sales numbers, every console is outselling the GameCube by a large margin, even the 360. If history is any indication, you will sell at least twice as many units if you make a game for anything other than the Revolution.

@ oz

Kiddified? I guess thats why some scenes of RE4 got editied out of the PS2 version for being to violent.

You are really an idiot.

yea, so jason has two options now
1) quit bungie
or
2) convince MS to publish a bungie game on a nintendo system.
pick your poison cause it ain't happening. its just jones making a comment.

Developers supported the underpowered PS2 because of the HUGE marketshare they had, not supporting them would be like cutting off your own feet.

Nintendo doesn't have the marketshare anymore and now they have the weakest of the 3 consoles. Sorry but I really can't see the controller pulling them out of the tailspin they're in. Their only hope is price on all levels, hardware and downloadable software. If the price is dirt cheap on both levels they'll regain some of their lost share.

Who cares?
Seriously, Halo is one of the most overhyped and underwhelming games of all time.

Let Nintendo stick to making quality first party software, and let the tards like oz and procs keep buying it for other systems.

I have higher standards than "the father of Halo."

"You do understand that rev is more attractive from a developers standpoitn right now because the dev architecture is like that of current generation, while still haveing more power."

If anything it's LESS attractive because of the totally different direction Nintendo is going, different controller, less power, emphasis on "retro" titles. Unless Ninendo can market itself from a price standpoint they will have really hurt themselves this generation. You could expect a LOT less 3rd party titles unless they regain their lost marketshare.

FANBOY WARS! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

*blink*

Sales are only half the game, of course. The other half is development costs, which should be substantially lower on the Revolution over the first few years. That advantage won't last forever as more tools are written for the other systems, and programmers get more used to programming for it, but it should help a lot in the short-term.

Also, when you talk about market share and user base, you're talking next generation. The reality is we don't know what's going to happen this generation. It could look the same, or it could look substantially different.

Does anybody really doubt that the Rev, at the competitive price point that it has, will fly off the shelves at launch as fast as they can get them in stock, like the 360 did? Now how long this will last, who can say. But at least initially, unless the PS3 shocks us and launches ahead of the Revolution, I can't see Nintendo ending up in "last" again. (If sales go PS3 20 mil, 360 19 mil, Rev 18 mil, there's no real loser, now is there)

Nintendo has traditionally always depended on first and second party providers. They aren't looking to recapture market share, but instead grow the market. They've got EA and Activision, as well as many Japanese developers...which is not bad for a machine that hasn't even be specced out, yet. I think we'll see the Rev come out in a big way at E3 this year. Imagine if the Rev hits the streets with a bunch of games at RE4's graphic level.

http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=497

Nintendo is looking to use the GC codebase to speed delivery of games for the Revolution. Lower cost of develeopment is certainly going to be a factor...but ultimately sales of the machine will determine where the developers go.

the idiots dont go away do they lol, Actually Gamecube wsnt in 3rd it was in 2nd in world wide sales which matter much more than just U.S. Sales

mmmm... sounds likes he wants a job in Nintendo. He could easily leave his company and make somthing with Nintendo money. Microsoft bought Halo not his creator. Any way, whatever Bill Gates says about Nintendo trying to make them look bad is slapped down when his Killer app creator talks good about the competition. But why Bill is angry? The Xbox is a nice media center extender, which was the main feature, so they did good.

I tell you what, Art Guy and prOcs must really think Mr. Jones is a dumbass. After all, why on earth would he use words like "extremely interested" to describe how he feels about revolution. Or why would he say he has, "great ideas" for it if they could be done on any old console. I'm guessing his "great ideas" have something to do with the console being "completely different" as prOcs said. But why on earth would the guy responsible for Halo be "extremely interested", or have "great ideas" for a console that prOcs describes as "clearly underpowered", "the weakest of the 3 consoles", and therefore "it's LESS attractive".

Personally, I don't really care if the guy responsible for Halo makes a game for Revo or not, but I'm not not a 360 fanboy so I don't find this threatening like prOcs clearly does.

Obviously prOcs and Art Guy know something that Jason Jones doesn't. After all, if the Revo is such a POS, why would this guy be interested? Why would he be wasting time thinking up ideas for the Revolution when that time could be spent on a ideas for a "REAL" console?

Oh, wait. Maybe its because the 3 core processor in the 360 isn't what inpires creative minds to get out of the box. Maybe its because the 360 is essentially just a faster version of the same old thing. Maybe impressive performance specs aren't what drive some minds to new ideas.

I mean cmon, even trolls like prOcs can see that the Revo will be good for the industry if it can inspire minds like Jason Jones to get new ideas. Surely we can all admit that when developers are challenged with new and creative concepts, good things can result for everyone.

I'm glad that the PS3 and to a smaller extent the 360 are pushing the hardware to new heights. But thats not the only area we need to push. We need to push creativity and originality as well. And ok, maybe the Revo won't do that, but at least its an attempt. So lets see what happens with it before we decide to condemn it. Only fanboys feel the need to jump on a forum and slam consoles when they aren't even out yet. Then they can't lie and say they have it and hate it like alot of anti-360 fanboys are doing now. Maybe if the 360 sales numbers weren't so far below expectations, the 360 trolls wouldn't feel the need to lash out at every opportunity. I'm sorry MS isn't selling more consols, theres nothing I can do about it. Well, I guess I could buy one, but there are none around here, so I can't even help out by doing that. Yes, I would buy a 360 if I could find one, but I can't so I'm stuck on the Joystiq responding to trolls.

I have a couple of comments.

First, about FPS with Nintendo-style controller: It works. I've played it. See Paul Rajlich's CAVE Quake:

http://brighton.ncsa.uiuc.edu/~prajlich/caveQuake/

A feeling of immersion will probably diminish with screen size, but I think most folks have a big enough screen to enjoy it.

Related, a couple guys in my VR class in grad school made different light-saber games, too. Multiplayer over network was kinda fun.

My other comment -

If it is the possibilities of the controller that excites JJ, why couldn't MS or a 3rd party make a 360 controller with an accelerometer and/or some IR capabilities? MS could probably just buy a manufacturer if patents are an issue. Googling for "OEM accelerometer" shows some parts that are less than $8 ea. when bought in bulk.

oh look it is an Xbox 360 available for purchase

And now I'm a troll because I say anything but postive feedback for the Revolution? Man you need to take off your fanboy blinders.

MS fanboys, nintendo is not stealing halo...nothing can steal or hurt halo, but itself. Until bungie fucks up and releases a shitty game, you have nothing to worry about. Stop whining. Your just giving the nintendo fans what they want to hear...your jealousy. Besides, like the other guy said...showing interest is far from announcing a game for it...and who would be work for? You think nintendo is going to scoop him up to make a first party nintendo FPS? Fat chance.

The revolution is going to get more original titles this time around than any other system, because it is so unique, it is going to attract new ideas for new franchises and games because of it's controller. So get used to it. This could hurt it...or be good for it. Because alot of "original" games sell horribly, unfortunately. But I must say one thing...if the revolution is SO attractive to developers...why isn't it getting RE5? Why are these cross-platform titles one-by-one being announced for everything BUT revolution? New splinter cell, new Medal of Honor (which looks like it may be making a comeback based on the Game Informer article I just read about it) Will EA release it's sports games for it? I'm talking about those big name, non-exclusive titles, that EVERY system cannot do without. The titles that attract John Q. Public...unfortunately for nintendo, John Q. is going to buy the system that has the best graphics in the new madden game on there HDTV for the best price. It's a safe bet that they already lost that bet. Last time around, they got the short end of the stick because of lack of online. This time they have the online structure...are they getting the short end of the stick because of there innovation? or have the big developers lost all hope for nintendo? or are they just waiting to see what happens? Nintendo's being so quiet is what I think is hurting them...developers want to know things. Is that classic shell coming with the console? Because if it's not capcom doesn't know if they need to take the time to design RE5 to work with the wand controller, or just a standard control scheme.

I NEVER would have picked up a gamecube if RE4 hadn't come out for it. SSBM is fun, Zelda is great...but they aren't titles that make me want to run out and buy. I guess that's why I'm not a diehard nintendo fan. Sure, I was there for the stuff on NES, SNES, N64...but after N64, something happend. People stopped making games for nintendo. They lost rare, after SNES they lost square, and the rest sort of just followed suit. Sure, they still got some games like splinter cell, but no online. Square was nice enough to give them crystal chronicles, which was a great game, but far from the real final fantasy games that everyone really wants. Capcom made a move to bring RE4 and the rest of it's RE games to the nintendo console. That alone drew at least a couple million console sales...without them...where would the gamecube have gone? I for one sure wouldn't have bought it, and I'll speak for everyone I know and say the same for them. I know people who didn't even know RE4 was out until it was announced for PS2. Does that say anything?

I also disagree with this whole "marketing to the casual non-gamer" thing that's going on. MS is doing it to, but still playing it safe by mainly focusing still on the gamer crowd. Nintendo has repeatedly said this console was designed toward a non-gamer audience. The downside is...the only people that know that...are gamers. My mom loves to play little puzzle games and such on the internet...but The day I come home for christmas to find that my mom bought a revolution for herself...hell will freeze over, and I will admit that nintendo has succeeded in it's marketing.

Don't take this as a negative nintendo post...I'm just saying one thing...nintendo has put all it's eggs in one basket with this wand controller, and budget price focus. They've got a shitload of work cut out for them if it's going to succeed. You cannot deny that.

I think we are beyond 480p now, sorry Nintendo.

Don't get your hopes up Nintendo fanboys. You'll never get a FPS like Halo on the system. It would be interesting, but it makes no financial sense for a company like Bungie.

Adam: Actually, we are no where near a HDTV standard today, so we are not beyond 480p, sorry to break your bubble.

Well, something in the controller has piqued Jones' interest to get him talking about developing for the Revolution. I know the specs of the Rev look weak on paper, but from what I've read, 1st person shooters are a blast to play with the "rev-mote". We shall see.

did anybody read my comment or are you guys all retarded? bungie isnt making a fucking game for nintendo. microsoft owns bungie. jason jones is the head of bungie. get it?? all he was saying is that he has some good ideas for what kind of game could be made for the Rev. that doesnt mean they're making one. as cool as it would be for a great studio like bungie to develop for nintendo, its not happening. shit.

"Imagine if the Rev hits the streets with a bunch of games at RE4's graphic level."

Once again. I don't mean to slam the nintendo fans, that's not what I'm trying to do, but if the revolution comes out with games at RE4's graphic level...that will be...bad. If RE4's graphics are the standard at which you think the revolution will have, why even buy one? Without knowing it, your almost slamming the revolution by yourself. I'll admit, RE4 showed the world that the gamecube had what it takes...but if that's all the revolutions got, well then essentially buying a revolution is the same as paying $250 for a gamecube with a wand controller. I highly doubt this will be the case. In cross platform titles, I expect the revolution to near as good as the other guys on a standard TV...HD is another thing.

"Seriously, Halo is one of the most overhyped and underwhelming games of all time."

that's your opinion, but I don't see zelda or mario selling over 11 million copies these days (as of December of 2004). You cannot deny that the opinions of multi-millions of other gamers and countless near perfect reviews think otherwise. A good example of an overhyped/underwhelming game is something more like Kameo...it was ranted and raved about for years, and when it finally came out...got mediocre reviews. Mostly 7's and 8's.

I had a 360, and I can tell you, anything above 480p didnt make to much of a diffrence, andyone who says diffrent is listening to sony and MS to much. HD isnt needed, and barely adds anything to the games. It make the lines a tiny bit sharper and thats it. xbox 1 looks really good in 480p. Right now sony and MS are just spouting crap saying "hey the bulge in our pants is bigger" and only the dumb graphics whores fall for that.

Im all for the next gen systems, Im just noting going to listen to the garbage Sony and MS tell us. Sony did the same crap for ps2 and non of it was true. only the games made the diffrence.

Nintendo has good games, and they are already getting people like Hideo kojima to make exclusive games for it.

Honestly, I dont want Halo on a Nintendo system. Im sick of hearing all of the whining and moaning whenever I take off someones head in Halo 2.
"OMFG YOU HACKER YOU DUMB F***ING PIECE OF S*** IM GOING TO F***ING KILL YOU YOU DUMB F***..."

Besides, the first player was a bunch of crap anyway. Metroid Prime 2 on the other hand...

seriously... halo is so overrated... we'll see how nintendo does with FPS' this gen. i have a feeling that all of these halo-only fps fanboys are going to start dropping like flies as soon as we see some creative new stuff coming out for the revo.

go ahead and talk shit now guys... first of all, you have no substance. nothing with which to back your idiotic opinions... secondly, you're just making yourselves look more and more pathetic.

"revolution: the only solution." -Serj Tankian

and i'm out.

#33 -- "If RE4's graphics are the standard at which you think the revolution will have, why even buy one?"

Maybe because graphics just don't mean that much anymore? Once graphics reach a certain level I really can't see why they are even considered a factor. "Wow you can see their eyelashes!!" So what? Is that going to enhance my gaming experience beyond "Hey, that looks good"? Maybe that will help in a Pixar movie because you are simply watching it - but not a game you are playing. It's all about gameplay man. I have high hopes for all three systems and I intend on getting all three, but at some point you begin not caring weather a character model has 2 million polygons or 20 million.

Im sorry, but Halo hasnt sold 11 million. -_-;

http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-USPlatinum.shtml

Halo 1 + 2 have sold just over 8 million combined. And this is as of December 2005. Nice try.

Karmakin - Granted the total console sales are about even between the Xbox and GameCube, however third party games sell twice the number of units on the Xbox compared to the GameCube. PS2 titles sell four times as many, granted they have a much larger user base. I'm not sure why consumers don't buy GameCube games, it may be the kiddy image, lack of online play, poorly designed controller, etc, but the only publisher who is having any luck selling games on the Cube is Nintendo. This scares away developers who might be interested in making a game for the system and but still need to make a decent profit to stay in business. It doesn't take much to force smaller (not EA) developers into bankruptcy, one poorly selling game is often all it takes.

I think the Revolution has enormous potential with the controller and Nintendos AAA titles are as good as anything Sony and MicroSoft put out. But I am very concerned that Nintendo has made some misteps in the design of the Revolution that will continue the trend of less support from developers. Particularly the lack of ram (128 vs 512MB) is going to make the system look underpowered compared to other next-gen systems even on a standard television. That same lack of ram will mean that multiplatform games will take longer and therefore be more expensive to port to the Revolution since they will have to work around the systems limitations. Right now, the reason the GameCube gets as much third party support as it does is because it is an easy process to bring the game over from other consoles. If the process of getting the games functional on the Revolution cuts deeply into the bottom line, the third parties may drop the system. If Nintendo becomes the sole publisher of games on the Revolution, you will be just fine and happy if you have multiple systems, but if you only own a Revolution you will be missing out. I'm hoping Nintendos "big news" is that they are increasing the amount of ram to be competitive.

"Actually, we are no where near a HDTV standard today, so we are not beyond 480p, sorry to break your bubble."

As of January 20th, 2006 Panasonic has become the first television manufaturer to completely STOP manufacturing standard definition TV sets. Several more are expected to follow suit by the end of the year. Sure, today we aren't technically beyond 480p, as currently only around 3 out of 10 U.S. households have an HDTV...but this IS a next-gen console right? I think nintendo's move to not support HD wasn't necessarily a piss poor one, but more of a blatant disregard to support new technology, that within 2-3 years, the majority of it's target market will have in there homes. If HDTV wasn't going to be mandatory, I could udnerstand, but they aren't supporting HD for one reason...they can't. The revolution doesn't have the power to muster up those resolutions. If it did, they'd be supporting it, because there's no fucking reason not to. It's not required, but an option. Stop making nintendo sound like they "chose to not support HD resolutions" as if it is some sort of innovation. They had no choice, if they could have, they would have. Once again...why not? The damn thing is going to have component outs anyways. Nintendo made me think twice about picking up a revolution when that announcement was made. Those without HDTV's seem to be the ones who think standard def. is still fine...and it is...not until the past few months could I really have given you a good reason to buy an HDTV, but in 2 years when you bring home your HDTV and see how bad the revolution looks on it in 480p, in comparison to the 360 and PS3 at 720p or 1080i/p you will understand. If they support 16:9 this time I still might consider. I'm sorry, I wish nintendo the best, but it seems like everytime around the pick some necessary technology and don't support it. N64, it was cartridges over CD's, the result? $60 games versus $40 games. Gamecube, it was online support and to a much lesser extent a DVD player. This time, it's going to be no HD.

"If RE4's graphics are the standard at which you think the revolution will have, why even buy one? Without knowing it, your almost slamming the revolution by yourself."

As a launch title, a title with RE4's level of graphics would be pretty impressive, IMHO. I played the entire game in 480p, and was pretty impressed. How many games in the current generation boast graphics that good? Not many that I can think of. If the cube had launched with such a game, it'd be pretty impressive. If all of the Revolution's launch games come out at that level, it'll have a strong showing right out of the gate. Look at the 360s launch games; half of them are barely considered next-gen. Games like King Kong, Tony Hawk and Madden are rushed upgrades to current-gen games and it shows. Kameo was made next-gen halfway through it's development and that shows, too.

And current-gen has suddenly become eye-gougingly ugly, either. Look at the Burnout series on Xbox, God of War on the PS/2 and the upcoming Zelda game on the Gamecube.

The difference is this: RE4 looked as it did on the GC hardware because the developer had lots of GC experience, and was able to push the hardware...hard, just like God of War and GT4 pushes the PS/2 and games like Halo 2 push the Xbox. If the Rev is just two or three times more powerful than the GC (and Nintendo tends to undersell their hardware's power; witness the GC itself or the battery life of the GBA and DS) then you can expect some pretty damned amazing things.

Where this can backfire is if its power is too different from the 360 or PS/3 to be able to adapt games to its platform...and right now we can't make that determination, because we don't really know that actual power of the Nintendo, yet; no developer leaks have occured yet, either, so we'll just have to wait until E3.

Well, Halo sells a lot because it kind of is the only exclusive title for Xbox so its like a must have. The other one is Jade Empire and that was pretty good but didn't move the teenagers towards stores. What do xbox fanboys think of this news? Is it good or bad for Xbox360?

dsub you make some very good points.

Which is why this Nintendo fan does not think Nintendo will rise to the top. People want the newest version of Madden and the sharpest graphics. The point I am trying to get across is I don't care what other people want. I for one, don't want the newest versions of 3rd party software.

I totallyrealize I am in the minority here. My only hope is that Nintendo does well enough on comsumers like me to stay in the business. I don't care where they fall as long as I get the goods from them.

Good points though.

@ART GUY the Gamecube controller definatly wasnt poorly designed at all that statement is just rediculous, the only currently available controller that is better is the 360's controller, and anyone who dogs the 360 controller is frickin retard plain and simple.

Why are the microsoft fanboys the most moronic?

1. Microsoft BOUGHT Bungie, which means there will be no bungie games on the revolution(possibly DS a la age of empires but that's it). So don't go crying about losing a lackluster flagship title that only seems fresh to someone who hadn't sat down at a pc to play an fps since rise of the triad.

2. The revolution only needd 1/5th the ram to show the same image in a compressed non high def format. Same goes for processor speed, cache, ect. Based off of the specs that IGN hinted at, you can actually see more complex game worlds on revolution. Sure they won't be in high definition but the cache system is going to allow for much much more complex evolving computations. AKA the actual game play engines have the potential to be much much much more complex on the system, shove that down your HD hole.

3. Nintendo actually sold more gamecubes(not too many more) than microsoft AND they made more money off of each system whereas microsoft lost 120 bucks a pop off of each system to start with and still loses 27 bucks per system. An to add insult to injury, Nintendo made about 17 times as much money off of first party titles(in house) than microsot did. And if you want to add even more insult, nintendo sold more gamecubes in november and december than microsoft sold 360s and original xboxes combined.

4. High definition televisions have only penetrated 3% of the US market and less than 1% of the international gaming community. Sound like HD is worth it now considering the massive costs it's running developers? Even big companies like EA can't keep up.

5. Nintendo won't ship a system that crashes, won't let you save to hard drive, overheats, loses memory, ect.

couldnt have been said better JS

Why are some people talking about Nintendo not having enough market share for the Rev? I mean, if you want to talk about market share for next-gen, the 360 has 100%. Market share isn't really relevant from one generation to the next. We've seen the top dog drop down fairly regularly in the short history of video games. So the PS3 and Sony might be coming in with momentum but that doesn't mean it will hold.


As for Bungie and Nintendo, it's almost sensible. It won't happen, but almost makes sense. Sony is the big target for MSFT, not Nintendo. Sony not only has the lead but their system, with Blu-Ray and media center capabilities, is the true competitor to the 360, moreso than the Nintendo dedicated game box.

If Microsoft let some 2nd party games go to Nintendo it would hurt them, sure, but it would hurt Sony, too, particularly if Sony is struggling to gain some market and Microsoft manages to build some up between now and the PS3 release.

I still think it would hurt MSFT too much, though.

38-"I think nintendo's move to not support HD wasn't necessarily a piss poor one, but more of a blatant disregard to support new technology, that within 2-3 years, the majority of it's target market will have in there homes."

so in 2-3 years the majority of the population's gonna have a hd?