-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
If you could change the DS and the PSP?
- Thread starter arter_2
- Start date
Neutron Night
Banned
I would take away:
-everything
I would keep:
-nothing
Then I would:
-breathe a sigh of contentment
-everything
I would keep:
-nothing
Then I would:
-breathe a sigh of contentment
Die Squirrel Die
Member
All my PSP concerns have been mentioned already, so if I appear unfairly meaty to the DS, it's more from not wanting to repeat what's already been said.
Anyway. The DS, the DS, the DS. If I was Nintendo, I'd scrap it. Now wait, hear me out. My impressions of the DS is that is a composite of elements that separately, Nintendo have been working on for a while, perhaps as possible elements for the next GB. Now what I reckoned happens is that Sony announce PSP. Nintendo get a bit worried. The real GBA sucessor is not ready to go, but they need something. So they throw together these elements into a functioning handheld. It works for them as it creates a stop-gap and buys them breathing room to react more fully to the PSP with the next GB.
However, I'm unconvinced that this fractured approach, the so called 'Third Pillar' is really a smart strategy. For one, it places more strain on Nintendo's development resources. They have the GBA and the GC. They'll soon have to try to balance that with Revolution and GBNext development so as not to abandon the former too soon, without jeopradising the latter. They are going to throw a new system into that?
A DS failure would naturally be problematic and costly for Nintendo, but I think a DS success could also bring problems. What if Nintendo do manage to redefine gaming? Wouldn't a more straightforward GBA successor be a step back then? Would a new Nintendo handheld without dual screens, touch screens and microphones be accepted? Would they have to delay the next GB? Risk it up against the PSP2.
Okay, you say, they incorporate the DS features into the next GB. But then where does that leave the DS? Wouldn't that then make it redundant? They'd then have to abandon DS development, effectively a generational shift? While backwards compatability would no doubt ease the translation, but they'd still be in the position of starting their hardware userbase from scratch, having cut short the DS's lifespan.
Basically to summarise, no matter what position Nintendo are in, DS success or DS failure, it's going to make things difficult for them, unless the DS can summarily destroy the PSP and send Sony packing with their tales between their legs, so they can't even get a foot in the door. Is that really a likely scenario?
Anyway. The DS, the DS, the DS. If I was Nintendo, I'd scrap it. Now wait, hear me out. My impressions of the DS is that is a composite of elements that separately, Nintendo have been working on for a while, perhaps as possible elements for the next GB. Now what I reckoned happens is that Sony announce PSP. Nintendo get a bit worried. The real GBA sucessor is not ready to go, but they need something. So they throw together these elements into a functioning handheld. It works for them as it creates a stop-gap and buys them breathing room to react more fully to the PSP with the next GB.
However, I'm unconvinced that this fractured approach, the so called 'Third Pillar' is really a smart strategy. For one, it places more strain on Nintendo's development resources. They have the GBA and the GC. They'll soon have to try to balance that with Revolution and GBNext development so as not to abandon the former too soon, without jeopradising the latter. They are going to throw a new system into that?
A DS failure would naturally be problematic and costly for Nintendo, but I think a DS success could also bring problems. What if Nintendo do manage to redefine gaming? Wouldn't a more straightforward GBA successor be a step back then? Would a new Nintendo handheld without dual screens, touch screens and microphones be accepted? Would they have to delay the next GB? Risk it up against the PSP2.
Okay, you say, they incorporate the DS features into the next GB. But then where does that leave the DS? Wouldn't that then make it redundant? They'd then have to abandon DS development, effectively a generational shift? While backwards compatability would no doubt ease the translation, but they'd still be in the position of starting their hardware userbase from scratch, having cut short the DS's lifespan.
Basically to summarise, no matter what position Nintendo are in, DS success or DS failure, it's going to make things difficult for them, unless the DS can summarily destroy the PSP and send Sony packing with their tales between their legs, so they can't even get a foot in the door. Is that really a likely scenario?
TheGreenGiant
Banned
Insertia said:
Care to justify that? What utter rubbish.
Shogmaster
Member
TheGreenGiant said:
Widescreen can show everything 2 half screens can show, yet 2 half screens can't show what a single widescreen can show, like a continuous picture.
TheGreenGiant
Banned
Shogmaster said:
Yes its two divided into two, vertically. That's why its not continuous. Duh
Your logic is retarded. And what does that do for gameplay? You can also reverse that statement and comment about the +ve of 2 screens vs 1 wide. I like how you said half screens to emphaise your point. I look at my SP and think.. oh they sold me a portable with half a screen.
Shogmaster
Member
TheGreenGiant said:
Taking it awefully personal, arent ya? It's just logic.
DS LCDs are 3" 256x192 units. PSP's is a 4.5" 272x480 unit. Resolution wise, and area wise, DS LCDs don't add up beyond PSP's. So saying they are 2 half LCD of PSP's actually slightly being generous.
I don't think you can add widescreen to the DS.
it defeats half of the purpose of the DS.
Don't you think that a single (wider?) screen came across nintendo atteh R&D drawing boards.
The submarine tech demo would not have the same effect on a widescreen
one of shiggy's favorites
it defeats half of the purpose of the DS.
Don't you think that a single (wider?) screen came across nintendo atteh R&D drawing boards.
The submarine tech demo would not have the same effect on a widescreen
one of shiggy's favorites
PSP: Longer battery life - I'm no expert but it seems that my lithium polymer phone battery lasts WAY longer than most of my friend's lithium ion phones. Use a high density battery like that or better.
Have 2 battery bays available for hot swap capability. If they are positioned correctly you could have some really kickass battery power hidden in both the contact point and in hand grips like the PS2 Dual Shock controller.
Fuck I should shutup and pitch my ideas to Sony. Oh well, free to steal.
NDS: Too gimmicky to warrant thought into improvement for a useless portable. End propaganda.
Have 2 battery bays available for hot swap capability. If they are positioned correctly you could have some really kickass battery power hidden in both the contact point and in hand grips like the PS2 Dual Shock controller.
Fuck I should shutup and pitch my ideas to Sony. Oh well, free to steal.
NDS: Too gimmicky to warrant thought into improvement for a useless portable. End propaganda.
Bluemercury
Member
Neo_ZX said:
well at least it will be a gimmick with decent battery autonomy lol
but, balloon trip isn't an actual game, just something to make people think the two screens weren't pointless.
The REAL games that used the dual screens(Mario64x4,Metroid Hunter, Mario Kart) would have been better off with one large screen.
Most standards games just don't need the two screens. It's kind of pointless.
The REAL games that used the dual screens(Mario64x4,Metroid Hunter, Mario Kart) would have been better off with one large screen.
Most standards games just don't need the two screens. It's kind of pointless.
TheGreenGiant
Banned
Insertia said:
Why impossible? Just turn the widescreen handheld 90 degrees and you have the vertical orientation that Balloon Trip needs. I see no reason why a dev couldn't code their game this way. Being that it relies on touchscreen control, awkward positioning of the gamepad controls wouldn't be a problem for this game.jarrod said:
In the same way proprietary memory cards have crippled all of the console systems that have used them?VPhys said:
There's nothing wrong with SD but the market for ultra-portable storage is a mess of different formats. There's a half dozen flash media formats, plus some of them have released "mini" versions of the existing format, such as the MS Duo and miniSD, which has led to PCs, printers, standalone readers and other devices that support multiple flash media formats. And the procession of flash media formats isn't over, with new ones on the horizon. Then there's microdrives and USB flash drives just to keep things interesting. Absolutely no one is making it easy to standardize on one ultra portable storage format.
A lot of the posters here want something for nothing. Like longer battery life for the PSP or more performance for the DS. Newsflash: the DS has longer battery life because it has less performance, and vice-versa for the PSP. It's not as if the engineers were holding out on you with one or the other. The limitations that they pushed defined the other specs of the machine. It's not easy designing a system that runs on 1 or 2 watts.
As for the posters who want to eliminate the dual screens from the DS, or the touch-screen: if Nintendo did this, what would be the point of the DS? They need some way to distinguish themselves from the other guy. Would you bother buying a "weaker" PSP-like device from Nintendo?
The only realistic changes to either system are the minor ones (analog sticks, slightly better texturing, slightly better this or that) or the cosmetic ones (sleeker look, etc.).
My DS prediction: it becomes Nintendo's "main" handheld system, with the old Gameboy becoming a second-rate cityzen.
As for the posters who want to eliminate the dual screens from the DS, or the touch-screen: if Nintendo did this, what would be the point of the DS? They need some way to distinguish themselves from the other guy. Would you bother buying a "weaker" PSP-like device from Nintendo?
The only realistic changes to either system are the minor ones (analog sticks, slightly better texturing, slightly better this or that) or the cosmetic ones (sleeker look, etc.).
My DS prediction: it becomes Nintendo's "main" handheld system, with the old Gameboy becoming a second-rate cityzen.
TheGreenGiant
Banned
kaching said:
I'd like to see you play the PSP vertically.. trip and smash the handheld to bits. PLUS How the hell would you hold it, use the thumbpad/analogue stick and press the buttons. So I'd say impossible.
Tekky: Distinguishing between hardware relies on more factors than just hardware design - see this generation of consoles and the way PS2 continues to outsell its competition despite them having just about every hardware advantage the PS2 has and then some.
jarrod: So as part of the hypothetical changes, merge the screens and add some pixel real estate.
Hopefully the not so distant future brings us nanotech displays that can morph themselves into any shape a particular app requires or, better yet, we ditch flat screens altogether and start projecting images into the air, just like Gahig dreamed. In the meantime, I'd prefer the most neutral screen configuration possible which does the least to inconvenience or limit game design.
GreenGiant: Thanks for the kind thoughts. But I wasn't talking about the PSP, I was talking about a hypothetical DS with its screens merged in widescreen format, still retaining touchscreen control. This being a hypothetical discussion you'd do better not to think so rigidly - obviously reconfiguring the DS screens could potentially lead to some reconfiguration of the controls as well esp. if its determined that vertically oriented gameplay is important.
jarrod: So as part of the hypothetical changes, merge the screens and add some pixel real estate.
Hopefully the not so distant future brings us nanotech displays that can morph themselves into any shape a particular app requires or, better yet, we ditch flat screens altogether and start projecting images into the air, just like Gahig dreamed. In the meantime, I'd prefer the most neutral screen configuration possible which does the least to inconvenience or limit game design.
GreenGiant: Thanks for the kind thoughts. But I wasn't talking about the PSP, I was talking about a hypothetical DS with its screens merged in widescreen format, still retaining touchscreen control. This being a hypothetical discussion you'd do better not to think so rigidly - obviously reconfiguring the DS screens could potentially lead to some reconfiguration of the controls as well esp. if its determined that vertically oriented gameplay is important.
aperfectt00l
Member
Im still trying to figure out how the PSP is going to be advertised as portable without a false advertising lawsuit against Sony.
But i'd say PSP more pocket friendly obvious battery life.
DS: bigger screens (both touchscreen too) and analog stick something that goes close to flat but stil functionable so you can still have it fold.
But i'd say PSP more pocket friendly obvious battery life.
DS: bigger screens (both touchscreen too) and analog stick something that goes close to flat but stil functionable so you can still have it fold.
Well that's possible too. Truth be told, the dual screens I feel are sort of a waste in DS as I'm much more excited about it's other features (touch screen & wireless specifically) and think they could integrated just as well in a single large screen handheld. I think part of the advantge in dual screens from Nintendo's view though is it complicates emulation (which has probably had a huge impact on the GBA business), it's cheaper than a single large screen from a cost perspective and it's also takes less in battery requirements a single large screen would. It's a good way to differentiate DS, but I still feel it's a but unecessary.kaching said: