Pre E3 2005: Revolution release date?

Wii News | Release date for Nintendo's new console leaked.

The release date of the next Nintendo home console (code named Revolution) may have been leaked. Monolithic Systems Technology, Inc. (MoSys), the company responsible for the 1T-SRAM technology used in the GameCube, mentioned the Revolution in a quarterly conference call to investors.

This is what was said:

"During the quarter we announced that NEC Electronics will now use our 1T-SRAM embedded memory technologies on their advanced 90nm process, and that the initial designs to be incorporated in SoCs will be used in Nintendo's next-generation game console, code-named Revolution," said Mark Voll, Interim CEO and Chief Financial Officer of MoSys. "We are excited to be a participating member of the Nintendo team once again as Nintendo will roll out its successor game console to the GameCube in mid-2006."

(Listen to the webcast here)

So there we have it. Mid-2006, from the mouths of one of the new machine's hardware suppliers.

This is in line with previous comments from Nintendo themselves, who have stated that with the Revolution, they are working to Sony's schedule. At this point, Sony's PS3 is expected mid to late 2006.

More news as it comes.

Related Content

Nintendo President details Revolution at GDC
11 Mar, 2005 Satoru Iwata drops hints on Revolution, and upcoming DS games and Wi-Fi capabilities.

Space Invaders Revolution Announced
01 Mar, 2005 Rising Star invade the Nintendo DS with an arcade classic.

Binge & Purge: Nintendo are at it again
20 Jan, 2005 The Revolution will be a paradigm shift in gaming. This from a company that invented the industry’s hobby: flogging sequels and IPs at the hungry masses.

Page12 Next

32 Comments

Andronicus

7 years ago

Mid next year?
That's cool - enough time to finish Zelda '05 (trust me, with the limmited amount of time I have to play video games nowadays, it would take me around half a year to finish such a game...)

Alongside the PS3 - smart move I think.

GroovySamurai

7 years ago

Mid Next year hey. I think this is a bad move on Nintendo's half.

Sony had the early start last gen and they went the best. Now Microsoft is getting the early start - meaning most likely more sales

onggie

7 years ago

Yeah just read this somewhere else....Does anyone reckon that the new Nintendo will be as great of a success having said that it will be released after the XBOX 360 and Playstation 3?

LordPaludis

7 years ago

so it looks like xbox will have the crappiest graphics this time around then.. and probably the most users..

Hyperworm

7 years ago

onggie wrote

Yeah just read this somewhere else....Does anyone reckon that the new Nintendo will be as great of a success having said that it will be released after the XBOX 360 and Playstation 3?

It won't be released after PS3, or if it is, only by a few days. Nintendo are not going to let Sony get a meaningful headstart this time round.
It's very surprising that this has slipped out... Nintendo are usually extremely tight about keeping things like this under wraps.

David

7 years ago

How many times has the first to launch won? Gameboy, that's it.

Dreamcast was first this generation.....

GroovySamurai

7 years ago

^ Dreamcast is an odd case. It could have outsold all the other consoles due to its early start, but the publicity/campaigns for it was horrid. Unlike Sega, Sony put alot of solid advertising into there console and they reaked the benefited.

And with all of Microsofts money im sure they will get lots of early sales from advertising eg. This MTV unveiling is sure to do wonders.

ObsoletE

7 years ago

^^ didn't the dreamcast launch WAY to early though? like a year before the other's were even talking publically about the next (now current) gen consoles?

i guess that kinda whats happening now i suppose...

David

7 years ago

Yeah, I think the XB360 is somewhere between the earlyness of Dreamcast and say, Mega Drive.

The main thing to note is that the first to launch is always the least powewrful, so as of June next year, the xbox name loses the 'most powerful' tag.

XB is like the dreamcast in that it's pushing the next generation early, for the sake of one company, when the public don't really want it. Console sales haven't dropped off, and the great games are still coming, why move on yet?

What killed it (DC)off was the hype of more powerful things to come, and N64 and PS1 were going quite well in the meantime (Tony Hawk, Majora's Mask, Conker etc)

Even if you ignore the dreamcast, do you truly believe the PS2 is dominant ONLY because it launched 'first'? It was also the first system compatible with a booming new video format, was backward compatible to the last dominant system, promised games everyone wanted like MGS2 (which turned out to suck, but it looked good then!).

Who knows what will happen. But I'd definatley say the 360 is closer to the DC then the PS2 on it's current trajectory.

Last of all, I'd like to know what Jimmy Jones who bought and Xbox, another controller, a DVD kit and some games for $600 last christmas thinks of the news that no big games will be coming for his (still new to him) machine this christmas, becasue the company has all but abandoned it for it's new platform.

What I'm saying is that Xbox360 screws casual Xbox fans the most. At least nobody had bought a Saturn recently when the DC launched.
</rant>

So where is rev in all this?

How's this for a prediction, a 33/33/33 split next gen. That's ground for Nintendo and MS. Microsoft lose as much money again to get that ground, Nintendo gain ground back with a combination of power and accessibility (and maybe something better, who knows), and Sony maintain a legacy core group of who they now have.

I think that's AS possible as any other prediction.

mrcivic

7 years ago

David wrote

Yeah, I think the XB360 is somewhere between the earlyness of Dreamcast and say, Mega Drive.

The main thing to note is that the first to launch is always the least powewrful, so as of June next year, the xbox name loses the 'most powerful' tag.

promised games everyone wanted like MGS2 (which turned out to suck, but it looked good then!).

And how is that a bad thing? The PS2 was the "most powerful" console when it launched, but despite it's now inferior hardware, it sells like crazy and games are still being made for it. Too bad the GameCube, with superior hardware, isn't the same hey?

And MGS2 sucked? WTF are you smoking?

Honestly, the constant dribble you post is pure fanboyism.

armageddon12

7 years ago

Pwned!!! Um sorry had to be said.

But he raises a good point, the last half of MGS2 licked balls compared to MGS.

It doesn't matter about the hardware so much these days. Brand recognition will help PS3 sell. Xbox 360 will sell well based on Live more than anything else (although I'm worried about Live, read somewhere about 3 different account types, standard, silver and gold, wish it would just stay like the current model). Maybe Revolution will sell well based on its revolutionary new concepts? But given Nintendo's record on new concepts its unlikely (connectivity hasn't really helped the GCN sell, developers were just unwilling to utilise it).

At any rate it doesn't matter to me, so long as the games stay good and hardware becomes easier to program for - hence more good games.

David

7 years ago

mrcivic wrote

David wrote

Yeah, I think the XB360 is somewhere between the earlyness of Dreamcast and say, Mega Drive.

The main thing to note is that the first to launch is always the least powewrful, so as of June next year, the xbox name loses the 'most powerful' tag.

[The PS2]promised games everyone wanted like MGS2 (which turned out to suck, but it looked good then!).

You're missrepresenting me. If I understand you correctly....

I was saying that WAS why it was successful (it promised all the sequels to games from the previously dominant console), and that 360 lacks these elements so far.

Where is 360's support for a booming new video format? Where is 360's MGS2? Where is 360's backward compatibility to the previously dominant console (That is, for it to be the same, 360 would have to be backward compatible with PS2 games)?

The other option you could be saying is that the PS2 is now selling because it's inferiour? It's true it doesn't matter that it's inferiour but I'm just saying it's not just selling because it was first.

You also skipped my first point, so let's edit that for you, with the actual first console inserted.

Quote

And how is that a bad thing? The Dreamcast was the "most powerful" console when it launched, but despite it's now inferior hardware, it sells like crazy and games are still being made for it.Too bad the PS2, with superior hardware, isn't the same hey?

Funny, didn't seem to go that way.

I'm not saying first can't win, but that first does not guarrantee a win.

And yes, MGS2 sucked. For most of the game you played as an effeminate blonde pansy, At one point you were running naked down a hallway the game tells you is Metal Gear's anus. That's not what I wanted.

Here's a good review of it:

http://217.158.191.134/pma/14405

-----------------------------------------
I also don't understand how that post was 'fanboy' ish. I like Nintendo, but barley mentioned them! If I'm biased to PS3, why did I predict an even markt share? (including gains for MS).

I actually have no preference between Microsoft and Sony. I'm just calling it as I see it.

Last of all, how about your opinion on this paragraph:

Quote

I'd like to know what Jimmy Jones who bought and Xbox, another controller, a DVD kit and some games for $600 last christmas thinks of the news that no big games will be coming for his (still new to him) machine this christmas, becasue the company has all but abandoned it for it's new platform.

ObsoletE

7 years ago

^ disagree... MGS2 was a good game IMO... but then, that's all it is... opinion...

while the end did reek of alfoil hats and the like (conspiracy theories abound) i thought it was interesting to play from someone other than snake's POV, it was a shock to not be snake (well, unless there were spoilers prior to release, but i avoid all spoilers if they are to do with storyline)

i actually thought the naked bit was kinda well done, forced you to sneak rather than shoot...

btw: i'll read the review later, i don't have time now...

mrcivic

7 years ago

David wrote

I was saying that WAS why it was successful (it promised all the sequels to games from the previously dominant console), and that 360 lacks these elements so far.

Obviously you didn't hear that Microsoft Game Studios has promised sequels to it's most prominent franchises on the 360. That includes the Halos, the Project Gothams, Rare's games and I'm sure brand new IP's. A lot of these Xbox franchises are now well known, so that's a start. MS hasn't even announced any sort of 3rd party games mainly due to the console still being under wraps(officially). The PS3 will obviously have all those well known franchises too, which will no doubt appear on the 360 as well. If I remember correctly you can buy the Metal Gears, Grand Theft Autos, etc on it.

David wrote

Where is 360's support for a booming new video format? Where is 360's MGS2? Where is 360's backward compatibility to the previously dominant console (That is, for it to be the same, 360 would have to be backward compatible with PS2 games)?

What new video format? As far as I know, there is NO new video format. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are still fighting it out to see which will be dominant, and in the end, incorporating either format will make the console's price skyrocket. (which would then result in you posting how much money MS is loosing per console....again.) The general public is still embracing DVD, so why should they care that a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc can hold "up to 10 times the data of a current DVD"?
And as I said above, you can get the Metal Gears on Xbox, so look forward to them on the 360.
And that last comment makes no sense. The Xbox name is becoming or already has become a household name. You can read about it, hear it or hear people talk about it in pop-culture, from music, TV and movies, so I'm sure people will be aware of the backlog of games available for it. No need for it to be "PS2 backward compatible".

David wrote

The other option you could be saying is that the PS2 is now selling because it's inferiour? It's true it doesn't matter that it's inferiour but I'm just saying it's not just selling because it was first.

What?

David wrote

You also skipped my first point, so let's edit that for you, with the actual first console inserted.

Quote

Funny, didn't seem to go that way.

It is funny, because Sony came in and killed the DC with hype. Sega was already struggling and they hadn't achieved what Sony had with the PS1 - push games to the mainstream. MS on the other hand HAS done what Sony did - give the mainstream market what it wants and succeeded. It's established a brand and it won't go down like Sega did.

David wrote

I'm not saying first can't win, but that first does not guarrantee a win.

True, and in reality the only way to win is with games. It's always about the games, not the hardware.

David wrote

And yes, MGS2 sucked. For most of the game you played as an effeminate blonde pansy, At one point you were running naked down a hallway the game tells you is Metal Gear's anus. That's not what I wanted.

I guess you're not very open to new ideas then...
And like most people, you missed the point entirely about Jack's chapter.

David wrote

I also don't understand how that post was 'fanboy' ish. I like Nintendo, but barley mentioned them! If I'm biased to PS3, why did I predict an even markt share? (including gains for MS).

I actually have no preference between Microsoft and Sony. I'm just calling it as I see it.

Well the only thing I see is your constant "facts" about MS's money loses, ripped off ideas, and let's not forget that Dreamcast/Xbox differences. Where are your Sony or Nintendo pieces?

David wrote

Last of all, how about your opinion on this paragraph:

Quote

It may seem unfortunate that little Jimmy just bought his Xbox and a new version is coming out, but seeing as Jimmy bought an xbox years after it launched, I'm sure he's not in a rush to get the new one. Heck, Jimmy has a great range of games to choose from already, and depite that you think there's no more games coming, there are and are usually refered to as "3rd party titles". E3 is bound to reveal new games too, so there's more games for Jimmy to look forward to. The PSone has shown that people are willing to buy "old" hardware because it's cheap - specially compared to this new "Xbox 360 thing". And I'm sure 3rd parties will continue to develop games for the old xbox, so no worries there. If casual gamers can pick up cheap hardware and cheap games, they will buy them. Simple as that.

David

7 years ago

mrcivic wrote

That's pretty presumptuous, considering Metal Gear Solid 3 and San Andreas are not yet on xbox.

Quote

David wrote

I meant that one of the major reasons PS2 was sucessful is that it was the first out with a new video format that everyone wanted. 360 can't make this claim

Quote

And as I said above, you can get the Metal Gears on Xbox, so look forward to them on the 360.

As I said above, pretty presumtuous - one bad port a long time ago means you can get 'all metal gear games'?

You've also missed my point, MGS2 was so amaxing looking at the time it sold PS2s. Will 360 have one of these? We don't know yet. (not saying it won't, but we don't know yet!)

Quote

And that last comment makes no sense. The Xbox name is becoming or already has become a household name. You can read about it, hear it or hear people talk about it in pop-culture, from music, TV and movies, so I'm sure people will be aware of the backlog of games available for it. No need for it to be "PS2 backward compatible".

Once again, one of the reasons PS2 was succesful was backward compatibility with the previous dominant console. PS2 is now the dominant console, so 360 cannot be backward compatible with the previous dominant console like the PS2 was.

Anyway, if microsoft has such a great reputation (and I agree, the impression is there) then why have they only sold 23% of the number of consoles sony have sold? And it's not 'coz PS2 sold more before xbox launch', there were only 15 million PS2s sold at that point.

Quote

David wrote

You also skipped my first point, so let's edit that for you, with the actual first console inserted.

Quote

Funny, didn't seem to go that way.

"give the mainstream market what it wants and succeeded" - how have they succeded? A 15% market share? I call that failure. (although Nintendo have also failed in the same way).

Quote

David wrote

I'm not saying first can't win, but that first does not guarrantee a win.

True, and in reality the only way to win is with games. It's always about the games, not the hardware.

Well we'll see about the games then I suppose.

Quote

David wrote

I guess you're not very open to new ideas then...
And like most people, you missed the point entirely about Jack's chapter.

Jack's 'chapter' was 90% of the game. And yes I did get it. That actually makes it worse (Sons of liberty wank, 'recreating the shaodow moses scenario' crap, godzilla vs King Kong......all garbage.)

David wrote

I also don't understand how that post was 'fanboy' ish. I like Nintendo, but barley mentioned them! If I'm biased to PS3, why did I predict an even markt share? (including gains for MS).

Quote

I actually have no preference between Microsoft and Sony. I'm just calling it as I see it.

Well the only thing I see is your constant "facts" about MS's money loses, ripped off ideas, and let's not forget that Dreamcast/Xbox differences. Where are your Sony or Nintendo pieces?

It's because the 360 launch is topical. I'll do Sony and Nintendo predictions when we see more info.
Here's a preview: Sony promised God in a console for the PS2, why would we believe them again about the PS3? And if the Nintendo is revolutionary, how will third parties respond? If it's not, why is it called that?

As for the MS money losses - they are facts. They have lost four billion on the xbox based on their own quartely reports.

Quote

David wrote

Last of all, how about your opinion on this paragraph:

Quote

[/quote]

Yeah, but Jimmy bought the 'latest' machine only two and a half years after it launched. It's not like the PS1, which launched in 1994 (December 3) and it was almost six years until the PS2 launched.

So if Jimmy bought a playstation two to three years after it launched, he still had three to four years until the PS2 superceeded it.

And even if Jimmy bought a PS1 only a year before the PS2 launched, it was alredy not the 'latest' or most powerful machine, since both the N64 and DC were out.

Finally, PS1s were $150 a year from PS2 launch, not the $300 that xbox was a year from 360 launch.

Hyperworm

7 years ago

civ, speaking as someone with lots of respect for your posts, I do think you're being too harsh on David. He can have the air of a Nintendo fanboy sometimes, and a lot of arguments are pointed squarely against the Xbox, but basically all his points are well-founded, and you keep misinterpreting them as fanboyism.
"What new video format? As far as I know, there is NO new video format." - that was precisely his point.
The "last comment" he made on PS2 compatibility does make sense; if you're backward-compatible to a proven high-selling console, which the Xbox 360 is not but the PS2 was, you're going to get more sales from it than being backward-compatible to a console that didn't sell much, and thereby more likely to get the sales that will offset the "too early to market" effect. Obviously.

Try not to be so quick to attack him ... it's not sounding very friendly around this topic

Andronicus

7 years ago

I don't know any of you guys really, but I'm going to have to second Hyperworm's last post there...

I think David is making completely valid points here.

I mean, David made a point about where is the Xbox 360's new video format - he didn't literally mean that there IS a new video format. He was saying that the PS2 baosted this feature on launch, but Xbox 360 cannot make tis claim.

And the rest of it made sense too.
It didn't seem "fanboy-ish" to me - he was stating both facts, and his own opinion.

Are users of this forum not entitled to their opinion without being attacked?

I can see that mrcivic is obviously disagreeing with David, and that's all cool, but come on... he was just stating his opinion.

And I'll probably get told of for this post, even though I mean no harm by it...

ObsoletE

7 years ago

David wrote

Sony promised God in a console for the PS2, why would we believe them again about the PS3?

i think compared to what it could have been, the PS2 was "god in a console" at the time of it's launch...

the fact that it had a DVD Video player inbuilt was easily the reason for this, even at $750 (or whatever, i paid less than cost price so i can't remember what rrp was) when you consider that the worst DVD players at the time were still $350, an extra $400 doesn't seem so bad... that was how i justified it, as i'm sure many other people did...

backwards compatibility was another reason... players weren't suddenly dropped in with no games, simply plug in your old ones... and it had the ability to make them better (supposedly, the only real difference i've ever noticed is faster loading)

i don't think sony is promising "god in a console" this time around... at least i've not seen anything regarding the PS3... i agree that without the new video format to support it will be harder to justify a new console at launch, especially now that you can buy a fairly decent standalone DVD player for under $75... supposedly the PS3 will support UMDs... woopdedoo, personally i think UMD (movies... as a game format for a handheld, fair enough) is the biggest load of wank around...

BTW: is the XBox 360 backwards compatible? i've heard many rumours saying yes and as many saying no, just wondered if a final announcement was made (i would think it would/should be, but you never know...)

back to MGS2, i agree that it was easily the weakest of the three MGS titles, but in my opinion it was still a great game... it got weird, but that was the point, Jack/Raiden was "waking up" to himself and his past and it was f*cked up...

i also agree that i haven't seen anything from the XBox 360's future line-up that has made me go "Wow!" in the same way MGS2 did prior to the PS2 release... but then, i don't think i've seen any future releases for the 360 at all except PD0

BTW: i agree 100% that it is too early to launch a new console, however, the XBox (and MS) are making a name for themselves, whereas Sega were struggling through the previous generation and hoped to get a jump on everyone by releasing the DC, MS is in a different position than Sega was (or so it seems to me), whereas for Sega it was a last ditch attempt, MS are on the upswing, there are some decent games coming for it, and it seems to be selling them well, but it's also the easiest game to pirate for, maybe another reason for wanting to move on...

it's hard to say what i want effectively, hopefully this makes sense...

David

7 years ago

True, obsolete. That's why I bought a PS2 - the DVD.

But by "god in a console" I meant their claims as to it's power. "Toy story in real time" and "60 million polygons a second" were two common phrases at the time. We knew the Dreamcast did about 3 million polys/sec, so it had to be 20 times more powerful, right?

Well, with a few exceptions, the PS2 has only shown itself to be marginally more powerful then the Dreamcast - even with all the extra time games have been developed for it now. Compare Soul Calibur(DC) to Soul Calibur 2(PS2), Dead or Alive 2(DC) to Tekken 4(PS2) or Shenmue (DC) to GTA:SA(PS2). Certainly not a massive leap ahead, maybe even a bit worse in some ways (like jaggies).

Toy story in real time has turned out to be an obviously ludicrous claim.

And as for polygon counts? the highest Poly count in a PS2 game as far as I know was for Jak 2, at about 9 million/sec.

Now they're making similar claims about PS3 ("quantum leap" is the latest phrase they've used). Why would I believe them again?

Andronicus

7 years ago

Well...

A "quantum leap" is actually a really, really, really small distance, considering the tiny size of a quantum and all...
So...
But, I guess they meant a big leap, hey?

I didn't know that they were making claims that the PS2 would achive "Toy Story in real time", but I'd think that this next gen would come close - I mean, the PS3 will obviously amaze us all with its graphical awesomness.

ObsoletE

7 years ago

^^ no i didn't know the Toy Story in real time claim either... in that case

i don't even think the upcoming generation would be able to achieve this...

^ i love it when people use the phrase "Quantum Leap" for that very reason...

David

7 years ago

What about the TV show?

I think the idea is "universal leap" as in "beyond our current system of atoms, molecules" etc.

Which is equally ludicrous in anything but sci-fi.

ObsoletE

7 years ago

well, a quantum leap refers to the ability of something (usually a subatomic particle) to be in 2 (or rather, many) positions at the same time... specifically it's used to describe the movement of electrons around a nucleus, but it has since been "proven" that it can be applied to many other particles as well...

in this regard the TV show name can be considered correct, since the character exists in many places at the same time, but also at different times... and rather than as a particle, he exists as an entity, or soul... (that is, if you assume the soul to be a particle)

i hope this makes sense... i've only studied 2 years of quantum physics and it sort of makes sense to me, but also confuses the sh!t out of me too... (btw: the explanation is a paraphrased account of why the show does make titular sense from a Quantum Physics POV as delivered by my QP lecturer... although it was 3 or so years ago, so it mightn't be 100% accurate...)

David

7 years ago

David wrote

Which is equally ludicrous in anything but sci-fi.

I meant it is equally ludicrous for a product to claim it is a quantum leap, not the concept itself!

Just a clarification!

Page12 Next

View as forum topic

Add Comment