Even with the shell. Games that really press the PS3 and the 360's graphical power would either have to be severly dumbed down graphically or might not even be possible. Dead Rising, which is supposed to allow a massive number of zombies to be on screen at once without lag (a thousand, was what was said) wouldn't be possible unless the gameplay was dumbed down on a less powerful system, as the Rev is supposed and promised to be.
It's not just the type of controller that is differentiating the consoles this generation.
third party games might have to end up being ported up from the revo then. meaning that the ps3 and 360 port would look bad
That also goes to say. Games that are multiported most likely have the same graphics as the lowest gaming system it's played on, like in the current gen, the PS2.
So a lot of the multiport games on Xbox and Gamecube have PS2 graphics since the game has to be dummed down to it to be able to support on all three systems and not have a difference as far as gameplay goes (minus extras).
Sooooo that said, it could be that many developers will make games for the Revolution and send those games to the PS3 and 360. As we've seen in the past, the lowest powerful system has always been winning in the console race.
Look at Sega Genesis, less powerful than the SNES. Look at Playstation, less powerful than the N64. Look at PS2, less powerful than all the current gens. It's a vicious cycle.
Yes, but it wasn't the main reason that those consoles sold well.
And... I thought the Genesis sold less than the SNES? Maybe I'm crazy. I'm not too familiar with Console history beyond the 64/PS1 era.
But yes, PS1 won because... well... the N64 was not too great.
The PS2 won because Kutaragi and the businessmen marketing the PS2 at the time were geniuses.
The next generation of systems have a larger gap between them powerwise. The Revolution's key point being the controller also will keep many of it's games exclusive. The PS3 and XBox do not and will not support, unless made by a third party, a Revolution like controller. Unless a games designed for use with just the shell, but then why develop for a console with a brand new supposedly awesome control scheme when you're not going to use this brand new supposedly awesome control scheme?
Yes, but it wasn't the main reason that those consoles sold well
You have to admit, it did help a bit
I admit it, it did. But the PS2 wasn't the cheapest console, and it broke records. The GC was the cheapest, and it didn't sell nearly as much as the PS2. It was Sony's genius marketing which I mentioned, the perfectly timed price cuts, along with the fact that it had a head start, a library of games going back to the PS1, and the fact that the PS2 acted as a cheap DVD player, were what made the PS2 sell so well.