N/A

[jonjandran]

My 2 cents......

I've used multiple LCD screens on computers before and it's only good for text.

Movies sucked because of the bevel on the monitors. Same for games.
It's just to distracting.

That being said....I'll probably buy it anyway....My hearts still with the big N..... :(

[evilmess]

I find it very interesting that Nintendo would release what seems to be a sophisticated piece of hardware in a time when the competition from Sony and Microsoft are threatening Nintendo's market share and customer loyalty.

I really have a feeling that Sony's PSP is going to be a very cool little piece of hardware that will give the GB some serious competition. Even if Nintendo's next version of the GB is comparable to the PSP I think you'll find Sony loyalist choosing the PSP over the GB since they now have that choice.

And it appears that both Sony and Microsoft are in a better position for consumer dollars in the next home console war although I'm not counting Nintendo out of this race just yet.

So why would Nintendo release a third option that is somewhere between the GC and GB?

I think there's more here than meets the eye.

[bensenvill]

Oh I am DEFINITELY going to buy one..... about a month after its release when its sitting in the bargain bin for 20 bucks.

~Tj

[GameGuru]

Oh I am DEFINITELY going to buy one..... about a month after its release when its sitting in the bargain bin for 20 bucks.

~Tj

I just don't understand this thinking. This isn't a Virtual Boy like so many have said, it is a freaking GBA with two screens instead of one but not compatible with GBA of course. It's specs (what we know so far) are superior to GBA and it has two freaking screens! Why do you think it will fail? It is a handheld system with two freaking screens, not a console that sits on a table like the Virtual Boy. Has Nintendo made a handheld console that hasn't succeeded? The system is just announced with no proto type available and specs may increase even more and you doom it already? I am glad you won't be getting one since it will make it easier for me to get one on launch day.

Oh, we should sticky this until it launches so if it is a success we can laugh at all of those who, on the first day a tiny bit of info is released, say it will never succeed (and will be in the bargain bins for $20 right after launch).

[Rezrov]

I'm not a big ign.com fan, but the front page image they have for today is perfect:
http://home.bellsouth.net/coDataImages/p/Groups/167/167491/folders/113572/869339GameboyDS.jpg
They took the silly soccer example Nintendo HQ tossed out and added a goofy kicking Mario!
Man, I got a good laugh from this one.

- Shawn

[calthaer]

I'm not sure that the regurgitation of old games on the GBA is really Nintendo's fault. Seems like an industry-wide problem in general...IMO. I see companies taking a lot fewer risks all over the place, and regurgitated stuff lowers the risk factor.

GBA connectivity is golden in places like Animal Crossing, where you can d/l your island to the GBA and take it places. Works kind of like Chocobo World for FF8, in some ways. Good idea, I think.

The e-reader thing is very gimmicky when you need it to obtain all the Pokemon. For SMB3, it's something to extend the game if you really want it but you don't have to buy it to really enjoy the whole thing. Collectible cards are fun. Just not when you need them to experience all the game that's already on the cartridge (i.e. - Pokemon). Seems to me like the SMB3 thing is d/ling actual levels and data to the game - maybe I'm wrong.

At any rate - about this BS thing...I mean DS - garbage. I like my GBA - give me more original GBA games. And reprint those Castlevania games while we're at it...I mean, I have mine, but Harmony of Dissonance is getting pretty rare and sometimes goes for $50 or so on eBay. Printing games = printing money when the games are in demand, people!

[hezeuschrist]

Oh I am DEFINITELY going to buy one..... about a month after its release when its sitting in the bargain bin for 20 bucks.

~Tj

I just don't understand this thinking. This isn't a Virtual Boy like so many have said, it is a freaking GBA with two screens instead of one but not compatible with GBA of course. It's specs (what we know so far) are superior to GBA and it has two freaking screens! Why do you think it will fail? It is a handheld system with two freaking screens, not a console that sits on a table like the Virtual Boy. Has Nintendo made a handheld console that hasn't succeeded? The system is just announced with no proto type available and specs may increase even more and you doom it already? I am glad you won't be getting one since it will make it easier for me to get one on launch day.

Oh, we should sticky this until it launches so if it is a success we can laugh at all of those who, on the first day a tiny bit of info is released, say it will never succeed (and will be in the bargain bins for $20 right after launch).

it's being compared to Virtual Boy because it's arguably just as gimmicky as the Virtual Boy. It's going to force developers to rethink what they need to do to get the games into the consumers hands... and while not a wholy bad idea, Nintendo doesn't need developers asking questions. They need them putting out high quality games at rapid fire, not an experiment.

[kai123]

Well I think most people will agree that innovation has kind of taken a back seat. Don't get me wrong there are some very good games but it doesn't seem that get the attention they deserve. I think even Nintendo has noticed that their tried and true franchises aren't big sellers because they are the same game or they didn't push the genre like they used to. I think if things keep going in the direction of the all in one download your games off the net mentality we will see even more crap on the market. But I will play wait and see. If it sucks I won't buy one. Of course we thought the ngage was going to be about $50 around now.

[Dr. Morbis]

I love reading these apocalyptic threads. Why are the most speculative threads always the most debated ones? It reminds me of the heated Xbox vs. Gamecube debates that were going on during the summer BEFORE either console had been released.

For the record, I think Nintendo is in trouble, BIG trouble. They are seriously tampering with the one market that is bringing home the bacon for them right now. If they should lose the portables market...

[Iron Draggon]

And so while I continue to wait for a portable SNES, which arguably COULD compete favorably with the PSP, Nintendo chooses to release this instead. IDIOTS!

[Ernster]

I think there's more here than meets the eye.

You know what I think. I think it's just another stupid "business" decision from Nintendo..

[Ed Oscuro]

Hmm. More concept drawings (plus a concept drawing of the ideal DS player!) found here: http://pocket.ign.com/articles/473/473999p1.html

[Ed Oscuro]

And so while I continue to wait for a portable SNES, which arguably COULD compete favorably with the PSP, Nintendo chooses to release this instead. IDIOTS!

ACK, quite true!

[Iron Draggon]

Even a portable N64 would be a better idea than this. Have they gone mad?

[Ze_ro]

Hmm. More concept drawings (plus a concept drawing of the ideal DS player!) found here: http://pocket.ign.com/articles/473/473999p1.html

Am I the only one who thinks it's completely unprofessional for a news site to publish pictures like this? This is like CNN playing a presidential announcement while doctoring the picture to show Bush's aids wearing "I'm with stupid ->" T-Shirts.

But then, this is IGN, who seem to have about as much journalistic integrity as EGM.... the least they could do is put some effort into their jokes.


I continue to wait for a portable SNES

I'd still like to see a SNES CD myself.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Iron Draggon]

I'd still like to see a SNES CD myself.

--Zero

Yeah, I'm still waiting for that too. I wish they'd just revive the whole 16BIT era. Why is it that we have homebrews for every Atari system ever made, but nobody's making independent SNES & Genesis carts yet? I'd buy 'em all!

[link1110]

Never mind, posted this in the wrong topic, had 2 windows open at the same time.

[hezeuschrist]

Never mind, posted this in the wrong topic, had 2 windows open at the same time.

I nominate this for post of the year.

Golden.

[ReaXan]

Well he is a another fact....

You all are the most pesimistic,zelous motherfuckers to ever play video games


yall havent even played the freakin system yet and yall wanna say"Virtual Boy 2"

Personally I am glad Nintendo has realized that the portable gaming market needs alot of work,I was so damn glad when that freakin gameboy died after better handheld products where out on the market and died just because people are so damn cheap about freakin battery time.And then GBA was released and your the same people who flocked to it even though it was a freakin ripoff and didnt even have a backlit screen and wanted yall to rebuy basically refurbished SNES games for 30 bucks a pop,yeah thats showing me folks

For me I like backlite systems and I dont wanna live in the stoneage just to save some damn battery money because if the game is fun I will spend the money and have a freaking backlight on it so I can see the damn game and not quint my eyes.

"I dont want to carry around a carrying case"

fuck you to whoever said that you lazy bastard,why dont you go back and praise the GB and GBA advance some more you smuck

If Nintendo is trying to make something groundbreaking I applaud them,finnaly they see that if they can make a damn good product they can double their monopoly on the portable market,the GBA is a piece of trash but its like the only portable on the market too,NGage Doesnt cound

[nesuser2]

Well he is a another fact....

You all are the most pesimistic,zelous motherfuckers to ever play video games


yall havent even played the freakin system yet and yall wanna say"Virtual Boy 2"

Personally I am glad Nintendo has realized that the portable gaming market needs alot of work,I was so damn glad when that freakin gameboy died after better handheld products where out on the market and died just because people are so damn cheap about freakin battery time.And then GBA was released and your the same people who flocked to it even though it was a freakin ripoff and didnt even have a backlit screen and wanted yall to rebuy basically refurbished SNES games for 30 bucks a pop,yeah thats showing me folks

For me I like backlite systems and I dont wanna live in the stoneage just to save some damn battery money because if the game is fun I will spend the money and have a freaking backlight on it so I can see the damn game and not quint my eyes.

"I dont want to carry around a carrying case"

fuck you to whoever said that you lazy bastard,why dont you go back and praise the GB and GBA advance some more you smuck

If Nintendo is trying to make something groundbreaking I applaud them,finnaly they see that if they can make a damn good product they can double their monopoly on the portable market,the GBA is a piece of trash but its like the only portable on the market too,NGage Doesnt cound

Classy, Everybody else can make people feel bad without the word "motherfucker" and if we're so lazy and PESSIMISTIC, why do you whine about squinting your eyes, suck it up and take one for the team....

[hezeuschrist]

Holy shit, if I had one wish, and I could use that wish for more wishes, I would use it to bring back the battlezone.

I never used it before, but some people need a fucking earful.

EDIT: I've got a billion and a half counter-points for ReaXan, but I wouldn't be able to contain myself in a mature manner. Cynical asshole I am, 4eva.

I CAN'T HELP MYSELF, I'M SORRY.

http://www.dictionary.com

[kai123]

Let's try to keep this civil. Just agree to disagree.

[SoulBlazer]

Right. I think we can all say what we think about Nintendo without digging into the swear words. :)

Oh, and my last post stands.

[Oobgarm]

Let's try to keep this civil. Just agree to disagree.

LOL

That's the funniest thing I've heard in months.

[NvrMore]

Ah man, I love this thread, you can't pay for this kind of entertainment.

I mean, other gaming hardware is being designed with blatant gimmicks most of which aren't even related to the main purpose of a gaming device.. gaming, yet when a device is announced with a gimmick that is focussed on the prime aspect, gaming, then people are falling over themselves to tear it down without having even seen a prototype design or concept model.

I wonder if car designers have this problem..

Bob: "hey! Furds next car's gonna have a built in coffee dispenser and muffin toaster"

Terry: "Hoo yeah!!"

Tim: "hey this car's gonna have 4wd instead of 2wd, they reckon it might make drivin' offroad easier"

Bob: "HA!, it's just a dumb gimmick, there's no good use for that"

Terry: "uh-huh, cars need muffin' toasters, not gimmicks"

Bob & Terry: "Burn them!!, burn the heathens!"

Mel: "ooh!, ooh! Guys!, Furd's next car's gonna have a built in tootie horn that plays mambo No.5"

(warning, impending long run-on sentence)

Yup, gimmicks should only come in the form of sub-par additional functionality which bears little or no relation to the gaming aspect of the device.. like being a personal organiser and storing flashy pics and playing movies which you already own but have to buy again on special movie media just for that device so you can watch it in squint-o-vision oblivious to the fact that you keep buying bigger TV's and monitors because you think bigger is better and want to be able to see a better picture, except when it's on the device you bought for gaming in which case paying extra for a device so that you can rebuy all the movies you already have, at a gain to the device manufacturer, just to watch them on a smaller screen.

perhaps a dvd and tivo built in, or a MP3 player, anything so that you can spend more on a console just to essentially rebuy less functional versions of equipement which you already have... joy

It's only a gimmick if it's related to gaming LOL

On the DS note..

Still from a programming and development it has some very interesting potential.

Notably, stepping aside from the asthetics for a moment, the announced dual processers combined with those independant screens could potentially save some serious performace loss typically caused by having multiple viewing planes on a single screen, thereby leaving one single screen and it's allocated processing power free to focus on the main gaming plane while the other handles sub tasks and sub gaming functions or another gaming plane representing another aspect of the game, e.g. rear view, turret view, management and control, secondary/alternate controlled character (ala RE0), opposition monitoring etc.

The dual display is the easy part to develop for, you'd simply allocate the relevant sub features to the other window instead of cropping them to the main game screen (thus less things to obstruct the view on the main screen). On the other hand, it's dual processor which means it's probably going to be a pain in the arse to develop for unless N have put together a damn fine PDK.

Meh, there's not enough info about it to make any kind of valid judgement, so like all the other upcoming and undisclosed hardware I'll take it with a pinch of salt and save praise/critisism/condemnation/meh-dom until I see something solid.[/b]

[YoshiM]

Well he is a another fact....

You all are the most pesimistic,zelous motherfuckers to ever play video games


yall havent even played the freakin system yet and yall wanna say"Virtual Boy 2"

My my, aren't WE articulate.



Personally I am glad Nintendo has realized that the portable gaming market needs alot of work,I was so damn glad when that freakin gameboy died after better handheld products where out on the market and died just because people are so damn cheap about freakin battery time.And then GBA was released and your the same people who flocked to it even though it was a freakin ripoff and didnt even have a backlit screen and wanted yall to rebuy basically refurbished SNES games for 30 bucks a pop,yeah thats showing me folks

Not sure where you get the impression that the portable gaming market "needs a lot of work". From the way things look it's doing pretty well. As for the GBA "ripoff", if people had no problems with an unlit screen for practically 12 years then getting a new more powerful version with back compatibility then it's hardly a ripoff, is it? I must say the GBA SP was a kick in the pants but oh well. As for the SNES games: that I do agree with you on as being asinine. On the flip side I can see it as easy money as those are great games for newcomers to those franchises to play. If these people never had a SNES or these games it wouldn't make a difference.


For me I like backlite systems and I dont wanna live in the stoneage just to save some damn battery money because if the game is fun I will spend the money and have a freaking backlight on it so I can see the damn game and not quint my eyes.

Well, bully for you. I'm not fond of the GBA SP mainly due to the overall feel of it and the backlight. Even though it makes my GBA heavy the front flourescent light I bought gives great light.


I dont want to carry around a carrying case"

fuck you to whoever said that you lazy bastard,why dont you go back and praise the GB and GBA advance some more you smuck

Uh, say what? The GBA SP, GBA and GBC are shirt, jacket and pants pocket sized respectively. Obviously this person is efficient as they wouldn't HAVE to carry a case as everything fits in the pockets, which what I hear is a hip trend these days. And what's a "Smuck"? Is that short for "Smuckers" as in the delicious jellies and fruit preserves? Is this person sweet and delicious?


If Nintendo is trying to make something groundbreaking I applaud them,finnaly they see that if they can make a damn good product they can double their monopoly on the portable market,the GBA is a piece of trash but its like the only portable on the market too,NGage Doesnt cound

Funny thing: you say we are pessimistic about the DS yet you say they are making something "groundbreaking" and possibly a "damn good product". Who's more zealous? And NGage DOES count-it's marketed primarily as a handheld game system with taco-telephony options.

Having a second screen isn't "ground breaking" until we see some use out of it. Using what knowledge we have of the current game scene it's hard to fathom a decent use of a second screen. In this stage of the game with their almost middle-aged GBA it's foolish to release another handheld to divide their market.

[evilmess]

Just a bit more info on the DS.

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200401/N04.0121.1808.42530.htm


Billy: Will the screens be side-by-side, or vertical? Also, will the screens be set right next to each other or will they be separate, much like the classic Game & Watch designs?

Beth: They will be in the vertical position.

It's not much but at least I can get a better idea of the form factor.

[Cmosfm]

Never mind, posted this in the wrong topic, had 2 windows open at the same time.

This right here shows the disadvantages of 2 screens. Peoples is gunna fuck up trying to keep there mind on 2 things at once.

[Isometric_Bacon]

I wouldn't be surprised if this is just a marketing gimmick, suited towards gaging public reaction for a new handheld from the big N. Or just an excuse to gain hype.

I do believe that it will come out though, it just won't be up to everyones preconceptions. Come when it is released, it may only simply be a small remake of the Game and Watch systems, found within McDonalds Happy Meals, like those Sega LCD videogames that were available at McDonalds last year. That would be great fuel for a hype machine.

Incidently, I found this link the other day, and thought it was rather funny

"What the Nintendo DS is reportably going to look like"

http://members.shaw.ca/nervx/nintendods.jpg

[Cmosfm]

I love MS paint to much... LOL

http://img13.photobucket.com/albums/v39/Cmosfm/DSfatality.jpg

[GameGuru]

*** Cheers NvrMore ***

Amoungst all the hating for no reason at all except they are Sony's bitch, someone intelligent decides to post. And he owned all the bitchers with his post.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[zmweasel]

N/A

[GameGuru]

The DS is receiving flak because there's no legitimate reason for a dual-screen display. No one asked for it, no one wanted it. Of all the developer wish lists I've read over the years, "two vertically-aligned screens" never made any of them. The DS is the gaming equivalent of that new razor with four blades. It's saddening and frustrating to think this is Nintendo's answer to the PSP. (Although we must acknowledge Nintendo's disingenous claim that the DS is *not* a response to the PSP.)

-- Z.

The problem is I can't believe how small minded so many people are that are posted their hatred for Nintendo and the DS. For God's sake people, it isn't out yet! How do we know there is no legitimate reason for dual-screen display? Before computers could people fathom what the reason for them would be. People were damn happy with horses as transportation once and never thought of cars. Things change people. Just like these examples there might be a time when we say "How could we play the GBA? It only had one screen!"

Damn it after it is released and is a failure, not before! It's the same as praises something during development that later turns out to suck (Star Wars Episode 1 anyone?).

All you posted about how Nintendo sucks and the DS sucks should just hold out until it is released. One of us is going to eat crow and with Nintendo's track record is might not be me! I don't think they will ever do a Virtual Boy again.

Oh and I called some of you Sony's bitch because it isn't out either but you are praising it. I am looking forward to it too and will buy it as I buy all systems but I am not proclaiming it is the next coming of Christ or is Satan as some of you are with the DS. I want them all to succeed because I am a gamer. Stop your "my dick is bigger than your dick" thing and maybe we can all discuss it rationally.

Later.

[Cmosfm]

Im pretty damn sure that Nintendo's DS system is going to change the industry standard from one screen two. Ya know...that's like saying that Nintendo's e-reader is going to change the standard from CD games to all games being on barcode style cards. Or saying the Virtual Boy was going to change the way that games are played, making the transition from 2-D to true 3-D.

The point is, theres no need for it, its an idea that isn't needed and will make the Nintendo DS stick out like a terrible sore and rotting thumb. Thats like the idiot who had the idea to put a flower vase in the Volkswagon Beetle. It's a dumb idea that no one wants...you don't see Mustangs with built in flower vases now do you?

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Ed Oscuro]

I think it's been stated clearly enough that Nintendo doesn't view this as the answer to the PSP...but shouldn't they call it that anyway? Christ, they've got gamers in a fix the wrong way. At least Sony's got an announcement out there; even if they screw over gamers on a scale that makes the PSX's (fixable) shortcomings look about as harmful as The Wizard was compared to the Virtual Boy, people will still be happy that they got a nice machine.

This...monstrosity...is not going to win the PR battle.

I would've liked two screens horizontally myself...it's sad to think that the IGN design was too optimistic. Gar. As has been mentioned...

Handheld SFC/SNES > lots of stuff > Nintendo DS ( > Virtual Boy? This is in doubt...)

[hezeuschrist]

Once again, we're not damning it because it's new or original. I'm sure plenty of people tossed the Virtual Boy asap, but the thing had potential. It's easy to think of how awesome 3D gaming like that could be, or full virtual reality. There are a million possibilities for a device like that, one only has to think of a game and it can probably be enhanced by physical depth from the 2D screen.

The 2 screens, now I've learned vertically aligned... I can't think of anything. Having maps or item lists or stats for RPG's on a second screen could be nifty, but wholly unnecessary.

I have tried really hard to think of some great gameplay ideas and I just can't. Maybe it's the good kind of can't, the one where something comes along and redefines the whole concept, and makes people think why it wasn't brought up earlier. I'm hoping it is, we are all hoping it is. I don't think anyone here is rooting for a failure, we're just being realistic about it.

[SoulBlazer]

I tend to believe Nintendo when they said this is'nt in response to the PSP. This is'nt really a handheld system -- I can't see how they can make it small enough -- and a article from GameSpot had a quote from a top Nintendo exec saying that 'new systems are in development' to replace the GBA and the GC.

I just don't feel that there is enough information right now to be able to make a FAIR and ACCURATE statement about ANYTHING for this system. We'll get more information at E3, I guess.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Ed Oscuro]

I tend to believe Nintendo when they said this is'nt in response to the PSP. This is'nt really a handheld system...

Is not = Isn't. Say it with a smile :D

Anyhow.

Like I said, I'm also unhappy that people are still calling it the "response to the PSP" but...you know what? For all intents and purposes, IT IS.

I'd rather have a Tingle Tuner, so a strange little green guy can follow me around and give hints rather than...this...whatever it is.

BLAH.

I could totally see their next console allowing you to hook up to two TVs, except that this would cost too much (think another GPU that most people will never use, lol)

[hezeuschrist]

NvrMore, if you could be so kind to fill in the blank for me...


Bob: "hey! The PSP is gonna have MP3 playback!"

Terry: "Hoo yeah!!"

Tim: "hey Nintendo's next system is gonna have two screens, they recon __________________"

[Ed Oscuro]

Lol, yes, that was bugging me too.

[Ze_ro]

Just a bit more info on the DS.

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200401/N04.0121.1808.42530.htm

Boy, that really didn't clear things up that much... I get the feeling Nintendo themselves still aren't really sure what they're going to do with this. I hope I'm wrong and they're just being tight lipped.

Note that one of the answers in that link states that they're still working on a successor to the GBA... so even if this DS is going to be competing with the PSP, it is likely not going to be Nintendo's "real" entry into the portable market.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

N/A

[NvrMore]

I assume that by "other gaming hardware," you're referring to the PSP -- which you seem to have forgotten has been positioned from the moment of its announcement as a "Walkman of the 21st century" as opposed to a pure gaming device.

"walkman of the 21st century" Which is being marketed under the gaming divisions name and influence, primarily as a portable gaming system.

C'mon, you're seriously telling me you've got a problem believing the statement about the DS "not being announced in response to the PSP", but you'll buy Sony's spiel about "21st century walkman". Really, come on, it's an excuse for including a wash of gimmicky extra's into their system (some of which just happen to be based around some of Sony's product lines which haven't brought them much financial lovin' recently) so that they can get their foot in the related media market segments where their stand alone devices are suffering.

If they were serious about it being the "21st century walkman" then they wouldn't be naming it after their flagship gaming device, under the gaming division with primary marketing aimed at the gaming market.

A gimmick is a gimmick, ripping into a gaming focussed gimmick on a gaming system and buying into non-gaming related gimmicks on another is hilariously ironic to say the least.

Forgive the snip and cut here, you made two separate arguments on this point which are best put together..


The DS is receiving flak because there's no legitimate reason for a dual-screen display.


How do we know there's no legit reason for a dual-screen display? Because all of us can instantly visualize it and not come up with a way in which it improves the gameplay experience. Granted, we're not game designers, but Nintendo's own publicly provided example of the wide-view/close-up soccer game was weak sauce, and brilliantly mocked by IGN.

Well I hate to speculate given there is so little info available as yet, but let me put it from a game design/programming related point..

Two screens on a system, why bother, why not just have one large screen, right?.. no.

If you have a single screen and wish to use multiple viewports then you have to crop you display screen by either splitting it, or overlaying them onto oneanother.. this not only eats up system performance, it also increases the level of clutter in the display.

So, you can either crop the screen to accomodate multiple viewports in which case your software takes a notable performance hit as a result of having to accomodate for more than one viewport (increasing considerably depending upon the complexity/functionality required of the sub-viewports), or if they're sufficiently demanding, you can separate the viewports so that only one can be displayed at one time, greatly limiting the flow of the game as players have to interrupt gameplay in order to access other features.

Now, if you have two screens, each of which independantly supported by the gaming system ala multiple processors then you immediately gain the potential to avoid both of these issue.
Firstly can you display multiple viewports without suffering such a notable performance hit, in fact if the dual processor architecture is upto par, you could essentially display two equally complex/demanding viewports at once with a minimal hit to the system performance, thereby allowing such a system to achieve technical feats far greater than would be capable on a single screen system with ~50 - 75% more processing power (again depending on architecture and design, which we don't yet have even a vague idea of yet).
Secondly, you can eliminate gaming display clutter and gameplay interrupts without having to sacrifice functionality or features which would have led to such on a single display because such elements can be allocated to a separate display on which they are just as accessible.

Taking some gaming genre examples in which such is useful..

RPG's: Duh, easy one first. Simply set it up ala FF:CC with the top display being used for in game action while the lower display provides access to the various map and menu subsystems/ status and character control commands and management. Most useful for real-time as opposed to turn-based games. With a dual screen system such as the one speculated on above you would be able play and manage oyu character(s) without having to break the action to access the commands and menus. Else it becomes possible to monitor and/or control two characters at once without switching interrupts.

Racing: Depends on the game but you could essentially provide a 3rd or 1st person perspective on display 1 while displaying either an overhead or rear view perspective to allow the player better perspective of the race and other cars. Alternativly while one screen is used to display the standard racing perspective the other is used to feed the player real-time updates on events elsewhere on the track (e.g. crashes, obstructions, obstacles, position changes etc.). Such a feature wouldn't be feasible on a single display without severly limiting the game as the cropping and performance draw resulting from catering to multiple complex viewports would drag the overall game performance to it's knees.

Strategy: greater control over the environment, allowing either the monitoring (and possibly control) of multiple areas at one time or display of the typically deep and varyingly intricate management system without having to interrupt monitoring of an area or switching to a separate window/view.

Sports: taking for example team based sports. Single display for the currently controlled player while the other window provides an overview of the overall game via either a detailed, live field map or a overhead view of the game. Alternativly the other screen can be used to display the character who is going to be part of a specific play (e.g. pass, block etc) so that the gameplay can smoothy and quickly move between characters without camera/perspective switches.

FPS: main display used for standard FPS view while the secondary display is used for subsystems, menu's, inventory, overview, secondary sensor display/view modes etc.

Stealth: Main game display on first screen while the second screen can be used for special equipment modes, sensors, alarms, comms, monitoring etc. e.g. Splinter cell, your character places a cam somewhere, you're free to continue with the game as usual while the second display shows a live, real-time view of the the camera's feed without interrupting or obscuring the players view.

Anyway, the post's getting too long but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Multiple independant displays increase the potential for a system considerably, the performance regained from clipping, cropping and splitting viewports alone would allow games to accomodate features which would typically have to be cut, dropped or impaired for use on a single display.

Oh, one other thing. By using two displays instead of one you also reduce the overall size of the device as the system can be designed "compact" (thing GBA:SP - screen top, screen bottom, fold over) unlike a single screen sys, the size of which limitled to being at minimum, the size of the larger screen.

But again, like most everything said in this thread, it's all just speculation, there's nothing solid to go off at the moment and there is always the concern over system architecture and the PDKs created for it.

(if you've read this entire post, please note it is now considered a historical document.. the time of physical displays has long since passed and the time of direct neural feeds is upon you. Time has ravaged your once youthful gaming thumbs and your grandchildren await with the keys to your room at the cyber-home).

[NvrMore]

NvrMore, if you could be so kind to fill in the blank for me...

certainly


Bob: "hey! The PSP is gonna have MP3 playback!"

Terry: "Hoo yeah!!"

Tim: "hey Nintendo's next system is gonna have two screens, they recon it'll imporve the gaming possibilities by allowing the inclusion/implementation of features which would otherwise have proven too resourse intensive or visually obstructive for a portable gaming device with a single screen"


Again, it's only speculation, people seem to want to know what the gaming possibilities/reasoning could be for this, but for all I know N may just want to use a second screen to display cheerleading pikmin in a variety of naughty and explicit poses (to appeal to the mature gaming crowd - you know, movin' with the market).

[Flack]

I still haven't heard a compelling reason for the use of two separate screens yet. "Now you can see your inventory ALL THE TIME" is not going to sell me a system.

Think of a game like Pac-Man. Pac-Man came out in arcades and has been ported to every system ever I'm guessing. So now it's time to port it to the DS. It looks like your choices are 1, make it twice as wide and call it "Pac-Man Letterbox edition", or 2, put the gameplay on the left screen and tell people "Now with a screen DEDICATED TO YOUR SCORE! HOW AWESOME!" So either every single game is going to have to be designed around this unique hardware, or the secondary screen is just going to be used as a gimmick. Gimmicks don't last.

Maybe kids are more mentally adept than I am anymore, but I think two different views of the same game would be annoying and distracting, like the sports example mentioned. At best I could see a FPS/RPG/Flyer showing a map/radar all the time, but still ... that ain't gonna sell me a system.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Flack]

(wrong thread, sorry)

[NvrMore]

As I stated earlier, Sony's gimmicks appeal to the masses. The DVD-playback functionality of the PS2 certainly hasn't hurt it, nor will MP3 playback hurt the PSP. No question that Sony is aiming to tie in the PSP with its other home-entertainment gizmos.

Which brings us straight back to the point of bashing one gimmick under the premise of it not enhancing the gaming functionality of the device, while defending the inclusion of numerous other gimmicks, which not only have no relation to the gaming functionality of the device, but also push up the price considerably.



I don't see the harm in sticking with the PS brand name, considering it's one of the most recognizable in the world.

Sony's name is one of the most recognisable in the world, far more so than even the PS name.

If they were marketing the device as "the walkman of the future" as opposed to a game system with numerous unneccesary built-in gimmicks then their name alone is recognition enough - else they might as well rename their entire product line PS e.g. PSTV, PSCD, PSLI-battery etc.

The "walkman of the 21st century" is as an absurd an excuse as N's "not a response to the PSP" line - they're only believable to the most gullible of the respective fanbases.


What's "ironic" about mocking the dubiousness of a dual-screen display and the appeal of MP3 playback?

On one hand, you're praising the inclusion of a feature which has no bearing on the gaming functionality of a gaming device (don't buy the spiel) and is essentially just a gimmick tacked onto the device for little more reason than to increase Sony's market share in another sector.

On the other, you're mocking the inclusion of a feature intended to improve the gaming functionality of a gaming device - and thus address the devices actual purpose, on the basis that it doesn't add to the gaming functionality of the device.

[quote]You provide interesting examples, although several were previously touched upon, and many of them are VMU-type "improvements." A dual-screen RPG with the map and menus on one and the in-game action on another is handy, but it won't improve the storytelling or deepen the combat system. A dual-screen racing game with dual perspectives wouldn't improve the track design or the tightness of the controls. A dual-screen sports game will allow for multiple perspectives, but won't improve the AI. And so forth, and so on.[quote]

Nothing is going to improve the AI, core gameplay, control tightness etc other than the team making the game. No matter how good a piece of hardware (Note: I'm not saying the DS is good, or bad.. there's just not enough to know right now), the quality of the games on it, is still at the mercy of the developers. Quite the opposite in fact, in the end it's the talent of the developers that tends to make the system.

All the hardware can do is expand the gaming possibilities through the features it provide, and improve the physical and sensory interface between the user and the game.

Other than that, it falls upon the system's architecture, capabilities and PDK's to allow developers to make the most of the system and fully utilize it's functionality, capabilities and potential.

The above, were just examples off the top of my head, pulled up in 5 mins, they're by no means a definative list.

However, as said before, the programming and development options and benefits provided by a secondary, independantly powered display allow the expansion of gaming concepts which would otherwise be impossible or have to be severly cut back in order to ration the limited physical and display capabilities of a portable gaming device.

[NvrMore]

WTH.. Flack, you've lost me on that last post.. damn, have I posted in the wrong topic? or did I miss something

[Flack]

WTH.. Flack, you've lost me on that last post.. damn, have I posted in the wrong topic? or did I miss something

Wrong thread. I only slept 3 hours again. Damn sinus infections.

[NvrMore]

Fair enough, but damn, that one knocked me off step.

Go see a doc.. or cut your nose off. Sleep is good ;)

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Oobgarm]

I was reading Penny Arcade's update this morning, and I found this quote to be of interest:


The only way to prove a concept like this to people is to let them see it, really let them understand what it's capable of and why it's better. If all they had the will to do was pop out there with an ethereal press release and then retreat to their cave complex they should have kept their fucking mouths shut.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[NvrMore]

Sony isn't claiming MP3 playback will improve the gaming experience, whereas Nintendo IS claiming a dual-screen display will improve the gaming experience -- a dubious claim at best. Always-visible inventories and multiple viewpoints won't make the gameplay any more compelling.

Just going to split this one for a moment.

While Sony isn't directly stating that the MP3 playback, video media and other such functions will improve the gaming experience, they are directly promoting them as key features of the system when promoting it to the gaming market as a gaming system, therby linking them to oneanother as a means of promoting the PSP's percieved value as a gaming system.

On the other hand, a secondary screen can improve the gaming experience, it's foolish to claim it can't. Just the ability to display multiple independant viewports allows the elimination of numerous factors which had previously impeded, interrupted or impaired the general flow or scope of games resulting from viewport switching and/or overlays.

However like ANY gaming feature, it's down to whether it's used correctly or not.
Dual analog can be incredibly useful or a terrible waste if incorrectly used.
Rumble and force feedback are nothing but paltry gimmicks providing little if no enhancement to a game if used inappropriatly.
Dolby surround, can either take the atmosphere of a game (and thus the gaming experience) to a whole different level when used correctly, but if squandered or carelessly tacked on it is little more than a cheap gimmick which more often than not will bring down a game.

Gaming on the whole can be seen as a gimmick, and for a time was seen as a gimmick. In the end it's all down to how it is implemented, it's always been down to how it is implemented and with regard to the DS feature nobody knows enough about that to credibly throw it either way.


Sony's name may be more recognizable, but it isn't selling its other devices. Right now, the PS brand is hotter than the Sony brand.

This doesn't dissuade the fact that, like the n-gage, the PSP is being heavily promoted towards the gaming market as opposed to the other fields it's gimmicks appeal to. Actions speak louder than words, and Sony's promotion and marketing of the PSP is deafening.


I'm mocking the dual-screen because it's a bizarre, almost laughable way to "improve gaming functionality." The MP3 playback and other aspects of the PSP are secondary gimmicks; the DS *is* the gimmick.

Now, you say they are secondary, whereas if Sony's line is to be believed it's a "walkman of the future".

Again the concept of the DS is a far from laughable move towards adding functionality that can improve the gaming experience. It has practical application and it has a relevant technical purpose and focus.

However, again it must be pointed out that given the limited info I can neither state anything more than wild speculation on defence of such a concept as anyone could in critisizing it. All I can say, is that conceptually it has potential in both technical and functional application. Practically, it's simply impossible for anyone to say.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Cmosfm]

I'd just like to state the difference between a Gimmick and a Feature.

1. A gimmick is something no one wants, no one thinks about, and it's something that some company decides to add to there product hoping the "cool" or "neat" factor of it will sell it. For example, 2 screens, a barcode reader, etc. People never say "hmmm, I wish I could read barcodes and play games". Now occasionally gimmicks become more than just a gimmick but a feature....but that's only when there useful.

2. a feature is something that people want, people use, and people will actually buy a seperate machine just for this. For example, DVD player, MP3 player, etc....saying one of these is a gimmick is like saying the addition of Dolby Surround Sound to any game is a gimmick...it's a feature that people actually WANT! Sorta like DVD extras...people WANT DVD extras! Now sometimes features don't work like the N-Gage being used as a phone...it's a feature but executed terribly.

Hence forth...the dual screen is a gimmick and no one wants it.

[SoulBlazer]

Plus I bristle at force feedback being called a 'gimmick'. It's a FEATURE I happen to love. I was blown away with it for the first games like StarFox and Zelda: OoT (which had a PRATICAL use for it) and still love it just as much today.

One can only hope that by E3 Nintendo will have both a working model AND some games ready to show on it. If they try to do anything like what happened to the Phantom at the recent CES, they are SO sunk.

[NvrMore]

Many games, sadly limited to obsolete single-screen displays, have come up with numerous methods of real-time inventory manipulation, to the point where the interruption of gameplay flow is negligible.

Over-reactionary sarcasm, not really neccessary, but I'm game for dragging the discussion down a few steps if that's the lead you wish to take, I'm sure it's much easier than formulating a solid response, hmm?

Now, why you're limited to this sole application of inventory screens and menu's alone is beyond me. I hate to use such a cliche' term but, step outside the box for a moment (yuck!) instead of trying to regurgitate current concepts and formulae.

To use the inventory example however, if all sub functions, status and menu systems are handled on the secondary screen then the main display is not only free of interruption to maintain live gameplay but it is also free to focus on the gaming viewpoint, potentially expanding the graphical viewpoint and thus allowing anything ranging from clearer field overview to more detailed display of action and events taking place.

RPG menu subsytems, are however the simplest example, but they themselves could be expanded upon given the greater degree of resources and display available to them. Live responce, automatic information diaplay updates, gameplay storyline updates, events and situations unfolding live as the player is engaged in other matters without having to interrupt the gameplay as it occurs. The storytelling potential is certainly there.

Lets also not forget that we're talking portable gaming as opposed to home entertainment gaming here. Display limitations on portable systems greatly limit the ammount of detail and info that can be displayed on a single screen at any one time. Info has to be clear and as such takes up more space, thereby limiting the number of info segments that can be on screen considerably more than on a home system.


Will having a second screen allow the energies and processor power previously spent on a real-time interface to be channeled toward better, deeper gameplay? Or will we mostly receive the same old shit spread across two screens instead of one? I hope for the former, but I expect the latter, especially considering Nintendo's own awful soccer-game example.

Firstly, the pessimism regarding the outpour of crap that may be released for the system, can be applied to any system, whether it be home or portable. Release after release, the potential of a system is, in the bulk of cases, far from met and more often than not squandered.

Whether developers can learn to utilise the dual display depends on two major factors (again nothing is known to cover these so it is speculative).

First, the development tools, the PDK's and the system capabilities. If they're not up to scratch then the potential to adequately utilize any new feature(s) is severly crippled.
Second, and I'm betting you'll take this as fanboyish even though it is a major factor. It's upto Nintendo to demonstrate and highlight the value of the added functionality with their software releases for the system. In the beginning they have to lead the way, it's going to be leading the blind through the darkness, but if they can produce software that adequately demonstrates the potential they see, then they'll give developers the foothold they need to start working from.

Finally, the concept examples produced by any company's PR division are more often than not terrible examples of the actual concept. Need I remind you of the suppository shaped concept model of the PSP with the terribly photoshopped screen?


Analog control has proven absolutely integral to 3D gaming. It wasn't a gimmick, it was a necessary evolution that provided better, richer gameplay.

But it wasn't initially considered, someone had to take a chance on it not being just a gimmick and more an integral tool for 3D software


Yep, the force feedback has always been a gimmick. Anything which Sony mandates a player can turn off from an in-game menu adds very little to gameplay.

Rumble is probably one of the better examples of a feature teetering between a gimmick and a good feature. Most game make a terrible mess of rumble, something hits you, rumble on, yay :o . Other games have moved beyond the basic concept of physical interpratation of collision and used it for more valuable features. Subtle tremors indicating hidden secrets and items. A subtle, growing responce in tune with a building sense of atmosphere so that the player feels as though in contact with the game and not just sees and hears what is happening.

Again it's all down to the developers.


Hmm. I've yet to hear a Dolby Surround/PLII/5.1 mix that "brought down" a game. Could you throw out some examples?

Turok series.. ooh there's jungle noise there, now it's there, how the f*ck did it get there?!. I can hear a dinosaur behind me, oh wait it's nothing, so why's it there?, hmm..

Get the idea.


I don't agree with any of these points, as I've argued in many previous posts and will avoid repeating here.

I've given some quick off the top of my head examples, but short of my conceptualising an entire game for the system for you, it seems you're limited only to perception of concepts which currently exist for systems that also currently exist, hence your focus on the idea of RPG menu and stat systems. It's akin to trying to explain 3D pathfinding with a modified A*, in the 8-bit era.

[rbudrick]

I'm very surprised no one brought up a very important possible use for a second screen....head to head gaming with ONE unit...not 2 linked GBAs.

If you are in the car on a long drive with a sibling....could be cool.

Especially for FPS games in splitscreen.

Think two-player cocktail arcade cabinets....the screen reverses for the second player...except there's two screens, so there's no need to flip the one and only single screen.

Or how about a multi-player RPG...two people on their own seperate quests on two different screens. Sure would make the upcoming Tetra's Trackers interesting.

Multiplayer, folks....that's a big trend nowadays, wouldn't ya say? When you think multiplayer, the floodgates open for innovative different uses for that second screen.

-Rob

[zmweasel]

N/A

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Achika]

I'm very surprised no one brought up a very important possible use for a second screen....head to head gaming with ONE unit...not 2 linked GBAs.

If you are in the car on a long drive with a sibling....could be cool.

Especially for FPS games in splitscreen.

Think two-player cocktail arcade cabinets....the screen reverses for the second player...except there's two screens, so there's no need to flip the one and only single screen.

Or how about a multi-player RPG...two people on their own seperate quests on two different screens. Sure would make the upcoming Tetra's Trackers interesting.

Multiplayer, folks....that's a big trend nowadays, wouldn't ya say? When you think multiplayer, the floodgates open for innovative different uses for that second screen.

-Rob

To play head to head, for all this you'd need two sets of controls right? I don't think they are implementing that, only two screens. If you're playing on one set of controls and passing it back and forth, then you only need one screen.

Um, correct me if I'm wrong but Nintendo added the rumble pack add on (to be sold separately) in 97? and Sony came along with Dual Shock controllers (woo~ analog sticks AND rumble in one neat package) in 98....

Wouldn't this all be funny if Nintendo released this news bite so everyone would leave them alone to ponder "why" for 5 months so they could secretly work on a different "sooper duper projekt", only to bring out something else at E3?

Personally? I'm going for the PSP. Why? Because I bought the GBA in 2001, then in early 2003 they decided "Oops, we couldn't get it right the first time, please buy the new SP! It's super cool!" and now, they are saying basically, "We still can't get it right, two screen are better than one! Please buy the DS! It's ultra cool!" Sorry, I'd rather go with a market that Sony will most likely support for more than 2 years before deciding "they haven't gotten it yet". Instead of making new separate "hardware gimmicks" Sony has been making add ons, to work with pre-existing units.

Sorry, but if a 3rd party developer can only publish, say theoretically 7 games per year for Nintendo's handheld market and the GBA family is easier to program for than the DS, what do you think they will be making games for? Something that will potentially be difficult to program for/difficult to pass the Nintendo test/difficult to find a use for that second screen or something that will be easier and in the long run, faster to get your software out on? If Nintendo decides to support three systems, two in the same market, one of them has to suffer. 1st party software? Pffft! With their recent handheld track record, I'll go with the competition that has a clean slate.

[NvrMore]

One throwaway joke has you declaring that I've "dragged the discussion down"? Yeesh. And how exactly would you proceed to "drag"?

Choosing to mock as as distraction to a discuassional point,


Coming to grips with why such an experienced game company would come up with such a hare-brained idea requires a great deal of mental effort.

Already explained, numerous times. However seem to wish to continue focussing on it just being two screens, with disregard for the dual processor and memory and the possible performance benefits the combination of such can bring.
To dismiss the very concept as "hare-brained" without having seen such a concept in action and based solely on your own inability to look beyond what is currently available is incredibly close-minded to say the least.


"Clearer field overview"? Not a problem in any RPG I've played in, what, five or six years. "Free of interruption"? As previously mentioned, interruptions are negligible in most modern RPGs.[quote]

Greater graphical power can be focussed on a single graphical perspective, allowing for clearer, more detailed environments and field of play. Likewise, no switching to menus to cycle through them in order to access game sub-functions and commands.

Put simply, no, press X, switch to screen Y, select Z, dismiss Y.

[quote]RPG menu subsytems, are however the simplest example, but they themselves could be expanded upon given the greater degree of resources and display available to them. Live responce, automatic information diaplay updates, gameplay storyline updates, events and situations unfolding live as the player is engaged in other matters without having to interrupt the gameplay as it occurs. The storytelling potential is certainly there.


All the things you describe are ALREADY BEING DONE with poor, pathetic single-screen RPGs.

Really, would you care to provide some portable console examples of RPG's which feature simultaneous display of in game action and multiple menu and sub menu systems without cluttering the screen or blocking the action?

Or which feature live action feeds of other storyline events, displayed while the player is playing the game, without interrupts or flow breaks in the gameplay e.g. player fighting battle, display of other concurrent game events and storyline occurrences elsewhere arise to highlight such events without breaking the fight the player is in or switching to another scene?


It wasn't initially considered, no, but it became plainly apparent to developers that genuine 3D games required genuine 3D controls. Again, it was a natural evolution of videogame design, not an out-of-nowhere gimmick. Nintendo didn't "take a chance" by putting an analog stick on the N64 controller; it plainful realized that 3D games would require it.

It only became plainly apparent after it was given a chance and implemented. The concept of analog sticks on a modern gaming system was overlooked and seen as a gimmick on paper until it's value was discovered through it's implementation.

There were numerous other methods of 3d control being assessed before the advent of analog sticks, it simply proved to be the case that the gamble on the gimmick proved to be such a natural evolution in control.


Again, I'm not focusing on it, just using it as an example. You must be equally frustrated with Nintendo for being unable to provide a better one.

No, it's generally a better idea to keep new gaming concepts under wraps until they're at a sufficiently developed level, else you risk losing the impact of the concept and/or tainting the concepts perception in the public eye by showing an incomplete representaion.
Demonstrated aptly by the reaction to the concept of the DS after too little info was given to provide an adequate idea of it's functionality to box challenged joe public - that frustrates me.

[Ed Oscuro]

I'm very surprised no one brought up a very important possible use for a second screen....head to head gaming with ONE unit...not 2 linked GBAs.

I can't imagine Nintendo slapping a pair of controls into the DS (two people wrestling with a single portable would suck), or allowing a second player to plug in a controller (a la the Sega Nomad).

I also thought of this, though it was late last night and the Forums were down.

The only way I can think of it working would be if there was a cable that allowed you to stretch out the middle portion...even so, you're just as likely to have player X yank as hard as possible to knock the unit out of player Y's hands...a real nightmare for everybody who touches the thing before it gets into Agressive Jimmy's sticky little fingers.

You've heard of TGBS (Thrown GameBoy Syndrome), and I don't want to even contemplate the effects of YDSS. :o

You're right, it's nothing that hasn't been done before anyhow.

[portnoyd]

Who wants to play a game of ping pong? For some reason, this thread gives me the urge to play a rousing game of ping pong. I don't know why.

You supply the paddles, I'll supply the balls. BONG!

dave

[asharru]

Who wants to play a game of ping pong? For some reason, this thread gives me the urge to play a rousing game of ping pong. I don't know why.

You supply the paddles, I'll supply the balls. BONG!

dave

http://www.york.edu/alumni/Reunion/pics/Ping%20Pong.JPG



These threads give me a headache. I suprised people's fingers don't fall off from all that typing.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[portnoyd]

My apologies for boring the shit out of everyone. Definitely not my intent.

I wouldn't say that. To bore me would actually require me to read the posts within the thread. When I see a 1:1 ratio of paragraphs to quote boxes, I usually zone out and think about boobies or something. My brain registers nitpicking, and, hey, sputters out. I never said I had a large attention span.

Hey, I admit getting into these type of discussions, and it ends up like nuclear war - no one wins, no one loses.

dave

[portnoyd]

I mean no one wins, and everyone loses. I also never said I proofread my posts before hitting submit.

dave

[zmweasel]

N/A