The "Nintendo Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
MARIO 128 IN DOUBT FOR GAMECUBE?
NOA vice president says the next major Mazza title is "definitely not certain" for 'Cube. Oo-er
11:14 It's all going swimmingly for Nintendo at the moment; great games on the horizon, sales up, and even cool extras like the Zelda bonus disc to keep the people interested. Inevitably, then, there's some slightly less positive news a-comin', Jeb.
George Harrison, US vice president of marketing and a fellow who has been admirably frank and open in the past, has suggested that Mario 128 isn't necessarily going to appear on the GameCube after all, saying in an interview with CNN Money that Mario 128's prescence on the GameCube is "definitely not certain".
Mario 128 was originally shown as tech demo ' 100 Marios', but following Mario Sunshine, legendary game designer Shigeru Miyamoto said that a full game featuring innovative gameplay was in development. Indeed, the gameplay's innovation was the reason given for the title not being shown at this year's E3 show.
Harrison's comment suggests that while the title is still in development, Nintendo is undecided as to whether to keep the game on 'Cube or instead use it, most obviously as a killer launch title, for its successor to the GameCube, in the same way that Factor 5's Pilotwings sequel is believed to heading to Nintendo's next hardware. Either way, the lack of a Mario title for the launch of GameCube was definitely a blow and may be a key factor in the company's current thinking.
Nintendo of Europe had no further comment to add.
NOA vice president says the next major Mazza title is "definitely not certain" for 'Cube. Oo-er
11:14 It's all going swimmingly for Nintendo at the moment; great games on the horizon, sales up, and even cool extras like the Zelda bonus disc to keep the people interested. Inevitably, then, there's some slightly less positive news a-comin', Jeb.
George Harrison, US vice president of marketing and a fellow who has been admirably frank and open in the past, has suggested that Mario 128 isn't necessarily going to appear on the GameCube after all, saying in an interview with CNN Money that Mario 128's prescence on the GameCube is "definitely not certain".
Mario 128 was originally shown as tech demo ' 100 Marios', but following Mario Sunshine, legendary game designer Shigeru Miyamoto said that a full game featuring innovative gameplay was in development. Indeed, the gameplay's innovation was the reason given for the title not being shown at this year's E3 show.
Harrison's comment suggests that while the title is still in development, Nintendo is undecided as to whether to keep the game on 'Cube or instead use it, most obviously as a killer launch title, for its successor to the GameCube, in the same way that Factor 5's Pilotwings sequel is believed to heading to Nintendo's next hardware. Either way, the lack of a Mario title for the launch of GameCube was definitely a blow and may be a key factor in the company's current thinking.
Nintendo of Europe had no further comment to add.
Page:
OS X has a lot of potential, big improvement over 9, but it does still have quite a few bugs. Hopefully 10.2 fixes most of them.
How much did your G5 set you back? I want one, but they were ludicrously expensive the last time I checked.
How much did your G5 set you back? I want one, but they were ludicrously expensive the last time I checked.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> I would like a dual CPU PC, but I don't really need it for anything.
I will need it for 3D programs and it does get used in the latest Premiere (although detecting the two chips was an ghey process). The G5 however just blazes through anything I throw at it and although i don't get much of a chance to use it I'm very much looking forward to the latest OSX :)
> I would like a dual CPU PC, but I don't really need it for anything.
I will need it for 3D programs and it does get used in the latest Premiere (although detecting the two chips was an ghey process). The G5 however just blazes through anything I throw at it and although i don't get much of a chance to use it I'm very much looking forward to the latest OSX :)
That is not entirely true, it depends on what you are doing. The chips use completely different architectures, Macs being RISC chips, PCs CISC chips. Sometimes pure clockspeed counts, like in arithmetic operations, other times in FPU operations AMDs are way ahead of Intel, but behind Macs.
I would like a dual CPU PC, but I don't really need it for anything.
I would like a dual CPU PC, but I don't really need it for anything.
Yes, but remember a 1.6Ghz Mac runs faster than a 3Ghz PC.
At uni I've got a dual 3Ghz PC, took a while to get going but its very fast and runs games and edits in 3D very very smoothly (only in 3D and editing does it utilize both chips though!)
At uni I've got a dual 3Ghz PC, took a while to get going but its very fast and runs games and edits in 3D very very smoothly (only in 3D and editing does it utilize both chips though!)
And it will only get more powerful, as 3GHz G5s are in development.
The thing is, you get to a stage where it is difficult to ramp up the clockspeed anymore. 3 GHz has been out for a year now, and only recently has the fastest CPUs moved up to 3.2 GHz. The manufacturers can manage that speed now. When they apply that to 64 bit chips it will double the performance, and it is likely easier than getting a 6.4 GHz chip running, not to mention it would probably be more efficient.
I believe a 64 bit edition of Windows is due out next year, and I think Server 2003 might already support it.
The thing is, you get to a stage where it is difficult to ramp up the clockspeed anymore. 3 GHz has been out for a year now, and only recently has the fastest CPUs moved up to 3.2 GHz. The manufacturers can manage that speed now. When they apply that to 64 bit chips it will double the performance, and it is likely easier than getting a 6.4 GHz chip running, not to mention it would probably be more efficient.
I believe a 64 bit edition of Windows is due out next year, and I think Server 2003 might already support it.
Bane wrote:
> As it happens, PCs will be moving over to 64bit technology over the
> next 2-3 years.
And my G5?
Its the most powerful home computer in the world.
mmmm.
> As it happens, PCs will be moving over to 64bit technology over the
> next 2-3 years.
And my G5?
Its the most powerful home computer in the world.
mmmm.
well explained (I knew what it was anyway which probably helped though)
There have been 64 bit PC for yonks - mostly in the server market, but Sun for one definitely did home chips. The fact is, it isn't *that* important a statistic in the grand scheme of things. A 32 bit chip running at 2GHz and a 64 bit chip running at 1GHz are processing exactly the same amount of data, at the same speed. You have to weight the two, and then bring into account the literally millions of other variables.
Also, getting one of the current AMD 64bit chips is pointless as their isn't anything like a significant amount of home software to use the extra 32 bits in the cycle - Windows XP won't do it.
And, to tie up another argument - the Gamecube processor is a 64 bit chip running at 405 MHz. It's basically a highly customized IBM PowerPC chip - split the 64-bit floating point registers into two 32-bit sections that calculate two floating point value simultaneously and a the interface between the CPU and the GPU has been tweaked. Basically, it’s an idea ripped off from Intel’s old MMX chips that were designed for multimedia around the time people were moving over to CD-ROM en mass.
Also, getting one of the current AMD 64bit chips is pointless as their isn't anything like a significant amount of home software to use the extra 32 bits in the cycle - Windows XP won't do it.
And, to tie up another argument - the Gamecube processor is a 64 bit chip running at 405 MHz. It's basically a highly customized IBM PowerPC chip - split the 64-bit floating point registers into two 32-bit sections that calculate two floating point value simultaneously and a the interface between the CPU and the GPU has been tweaked. Basically, it’s an idea ripped off from Intel’s old MMX chips that were designed for multimedia around the time people were moving over to CD-ROM en mass.
As it happens, PCs will be moving over to 64bit technology over the next 2-3 years.
The games only use 32 to 64 bit anyway. As someone mentioned the PC only uses 32 bit and they have better graphics than consoles. Although slapping in a stupidly high amount will encourage the dense people to take the "That has more bits, that is better" approach.
Page: