Sal.Paradise said:
So what you're saying is, apart from a single graphical effect that makes something look shiny, they're all BS :) Quote here: http://www.cbronline.com/news/project_reality_nintendo_turns_to_silicon_graphics_for_mips_chips_graphics_engine |
Nope, I'm saying that those quotes were based on the SE techniques used from those movies, not the actual grade.
The quote, by the way, states this:
"Nintendo reckons the work with Silicon Graphics will enable it to skip a generation and go straight to true 64-bit, three-dimensional video entertainment."
This quote does not mean it was thinking that it could survuve with the Nintendo 64 could go into the same generation as the PS2. It means that Nintendo skipped a generation beforehand, and they're right in a way. check the publish date of this article:
23 August 1993
In the years preceding the Playstation gen, console generations were commonly identified by the algorithmic bitrate of the CPU. Starting from the videogame crash, we had the NES, containing a MOS 65C02, an 8bit CPU. Sega upped the ante with the Motorola 68K, 16bit CPU in the Megadrive/Genesis, and Nintendo followed suit with the MOS 65C816 16bit CPU. Thus, the Megadrive and SNES were in the same "generation".
The successor to the SNES, if the correct pattern was used, should have been a 32bit CPU, but they effectively "skipped a generation" and went straight to 64bit. This was what the quote was implying. Besides the failed Jaguar (which some have argued does not have a true 64bit CPU), a 64bit CPU was very unprecedented at the time, considering the PC itself was still in the 32bit era (some special instructions from MMX could process 64bit, but the main registers of the Pentium/Pentium II were still 32bit). The main CPUs at the time that ran 64bit were the IRIX workstations developed by Silicon Graphics.