Post by: vudu on July 29, 2003, 05:10:10 AM
unfortunately, i'm not that technically inclined, so the information in the article means very little to me. anyone care to explain?
Post by: KnowsNothing on July 29, 2003, 05:19:58 AM
FWGOMH!!!
Post by: oohhboy on July 29, 2003, 05:52:33 AM
Why multi-channel sound beyond 2 channels? This is a handheld right?
No word on the screen. Divx would have no problems fitting 6 hours of video on that disc. Why use such a hungery compressor?
This thing is a frankeinsten. It looks like a whole lot of parts thrown together and half of it isn't got anything to do with gaming. It is going to be so bloody exspensive and burning batteries.
Post by: KnowsNothing on July 29, 2003, 05:56:22 AM
Post by: Grey Ninja on July 29, 2003, 05:57:33 AM
I gather that it will be able to handle graphics about on par with an N64 or maybe a little better, but I ain't going to say that it's outright better until I see some gameplay shots. The sound capability seems to be quite good, although the speaker present on the unit will likely be quite crappy. If you want to buy one, buy some nice headphones, or be prepared to spend a lot of time plugged into your reciever.
They have included some hardware MPEG playback, so be prepared for a lot of FMV in your handheld games from Sony. *sigh*
However, I must mention that they still have not mentioned the power requirements for all this. The specs are quite impressive, and a lot more than I thought they would be. But that's meaningless if the power requirements are absurd. It goes without saying that it won't be running off AA batteries, and will require a lithium ion battery. But jsut how much life that battery will have remains to be seen. I am thinking that it won't last much more than 3 or 4 hours tops.
Post by: evilnate on July 29, 2003, 06:05:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
Why multi-channel sound beyond 2 channels? This is a handheld right?
At a guess, I'd say that they're planning on giving the thing the ability to be hooked up to a television and reciever straight out of the box. It would be a selling point vs. the GBA, since in order to play GBA games on television you have to buy a Gamecube and a gameboy player. However, like everyone else here, I've got some serious questions about the battery life of this thing, especially given it's parallel processors.
Post by: Ian Sane on July 29, 2003, 07:09:43 AM
There are a couple of issues that haven't been addressed and I'm not going to really make any judgment until they are. Like everyone mentioned battery life is of course a major issue. Another one has to do with the screen. What size is it? Is it lit up in someway? One of the big flaws with the N-Gage is the sucky screen. There's also the issue of the system size and shape. The system has to be small and ergonomic or it won't cut it. And finally of course there are the games.
Post by: vudu on July 29, 2003, 07:23:14 AM
Post by: MadMan on July 29, 2003, 11:38:54 AM
Post by: HiTmaN on July 29, 2003, 02:19:12 PM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on July 29, 2003, 03:03:49 PM
If I ever pick up one it will be to take it apart and figure out how they crammed all of these things into something I can fit in my pocket. Just one more thing on it's size. How many people own a wireless router? How many own a pda? How many own a high end sound card or receiver? How many people have a lithium ion battery?
-How many people wonder how hot something with all of these things will be when probablly not cooled at all in their pocket?
The thing is a heat disipation nightmare. First you have a disc drive. Thats a great start to keeping down heat /rolls eyes. Gee only 20 or so watts Next you have two decently powerful cpus, basically copies of each other with different bus architecture. (CPU has double the speed, GPU has double the bus) thats another 20 watts atleast. Next the wireless. This wont get too hot on its own maybe 5 watts. Sound. if this thing is going to run 7.1 sound through the cpu, it could only possibly be done during a movie, and frankly I have to wonder why if thats the only reason. The only time I have even used 7.1 sound is for 3 classical songs, and even at that, it devoids movies. Have you ever heard of a 7.1 sound movie? For that matter can you name 10x 6.1 movies? There just aren't that many. Now you want to add in the fact that sony will basically control the media, this is going to make for a great idea. Buy movies designed for low quality, forced into a handheld.
Blah, expect this thing to put out 60 watts of heat. For any of you that wonder how much that is, rip off the heatsink of a pentium 3 1.3ghz and put your hand on it. You will get about the same feeling.
Oh well, I have ranted a lot but hey, when someone puts together what is beyond most laptops and says it is a handheld, I have to wonder.
Post by: Clonester on July 29, 2003, 04:18:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: manunited4eva22
If I ever pick up one it will be to take it apart and figure out how they crammed all of these things into something I can fit in my pocket.
I wonder which is more likely- Sony cramming all that into a handheld or someone being able to cram the PSP into their pocket?
Gamespot says the screen will be 4.5 inches. It is pretty clear that there is no way anyone will be able to fit this thing in their pocket. With a huge screen, disk based media, and a $#@! load of hardware, I'll be surprised if they can even make it small enough to be a portable. Nokia has bashed the GBA for not being something you would want to be seen carrying in public. What about a huge "portable" gaming device?
Post by: HiTmaN on July 29, 2003, 06:51:29 PM
Post by: aoi tsuki on July 29, 2003, 07:25:29 PM
The 7.1 sound is interesting. I remember Rick Powers saying how cool it would be to have Dolby's headphone technology incorporated into a handheld system. I had thought the same too, although power and CPU usage seemed like it would be too high. Looks like Sony's using their own surround sound tech in the PSP to emulate Dolby and DTS's technologies, although it's worthwhile to note that even Dolby's technology only employs five channels (six if you include the LFE channel mixed into the left and right speakers).
Remember that the device will be used to play movies as well, which would be the best use of 7.1 sound. I don't expect it to be used in a real time environment (ie games), at least not all eight channels. I also don't expect it to be true 7.1 sound, with a true LFE channel. In any case it looks like i may be able to finally put my earphones to good use on a portable game system.
Regarding heat, i think it'll ultimately depend on what's being used, although i wouldn't be surprised if it got hotter than the GBA based on the sheer amount of hardware. Battery life will also be dependant on what's being used, but i'm sure it'll be shorter than GBA's in actual use. But if Sony's shooting for an older market, and i've posted this before, what's the big deal? How many of us in our late teens to twenties have gobs of time on end to play games? How hard is it to drop a device in a cradle to recharge it? Have i've gotten too accustomed to my bi-daily cell phone and PDA (before it got destroyed) chargings, or for those of us in that age range is it just not that big a deal?
Now if we could just get some info on price and games.
Post by: Mario on July 29, 2003, 11:36:16 PM
*switches GBA on*
DA DING!
Post by: DRJ on July 30, 2003, 04:49:23 AM
Besides battery life I want to know the cost. With Nintendo selling GBA-SP for $100 I dont see the PSP competing very well. When the PSP comes out likely Nintendo will cut the GBA to $40ish and GBA-SP to $70 which will really hurt Sony. Not to mention that the GBA will be around 4 years old by then so Nintendo may be ready to release the next version. And Gameboy has like 1000+ games already for it. Whats Sony going to launch with? 10 PSOne ports?
I do like what it can play video, if you can copy a DVD to it for viewing later it would be nice. Also might be nice as a MP3 player. But with all these features the bottom line is price.
Post by: BlkPaladin on July 30, 2003, 08:09:13 AM
A case in point is the launch of the PS2 they wanted to get it out so bad they released it with a subpar titles, and without a solid supply line.
And reading these specs they didn't think alot through. If you look at the board of a GBA there are two main chips (rather small) one is the entire GBC artecture they other is the 32-bit MPU. Looking at that list there are going to be be atleast 4 good size chips on board throughing out heat. And judging by the wording of things I have read they are going for power not function. "They want you to play PS2 games in you hand(s)." (From the Gamespy site.)
Post by: PIAC on July 30, 2003, 10:25:07 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on July 30, 2003, 10:44:36 AM
Post by: Grey Ninja on July 30, 2003, 11:46:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: PIAC
33 Million theoretical polygons? o_O im not that tech literate, but come on.. even with no effects or anything thats gotta be BS... hasn't it?
Yes. It's just as much BS as the PS2 being able to do 125 Million polygons, or whatever insane number they claimed.
I am personally thinking that it will be able to do about the same number as the N64, which at its peak was able to do something like 600 - 900k polys.
Basically, the polygon count that they give is with no effects, and the most pathetic polygons you've ever seen. It means absolutely nothing when talking about the real world, as it gives no indication of what an actual game is going to look like. It's my GUESS that it's going to be about at N64 levels, but I could be entirely wrong. It all depends on how well designed the system is.
Post by: aoi tsuki on July 30, 2003, 04:02:04 PM
Quote
Basically, the polygon count that they give is with no effects, and the most pathetic polygons you've ever seen.
Haha, if i remember correctly, those numbers were also with no light sources. Most pathetic polygons you've never seen.
Quote
A case in point is the launch of the PS2 they wanted to get it out so bad they released it with a subpar titles, and without a solid supply line.
i think that's more of a case of "because we can". The hype surrounding it was so huge that the masses didn't care about the lukewarm launch lineup, and shortages only upped demand. Nintendo's good for that too.
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 30, 2003, 07:05:40 PM
Post by: oohhboy on July 31, 2003, 12:56:07 AM
Post by: Grey Ninja on July 31, 2003, 05:32:16 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on July 31, 2003, 07:30:15 AM
I think just the fact that it's made by Sony means the graphics will suck. I mean they're already 2/2 in terms of making consoles with crappy graphics.
Sh!tty graphics is like a Sony trademark.
Post by: ActorJ on July 31, 2003, 07:41:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: kingvudu
i was wondering about the screen myself. if what grey ninja said is true, and the thing is as powerful as a n64, how are they going to make the screen clear enough to view the graphics? the amount of pixels that would be required to display such an image is mind-boggling on a handheld.
What? 320X240 is mind boggling?
Give me a break.
The PSP has a 480X272 screen.
Post by: Clonester on July 31, 2003, 10:35:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: HiTmaN
Yes all that, but dont you think Sony has thought of that? Sony is trying to dominate the handheld market now. Do you think Sony would get all this hardware, and make a gigantic portable system? Think with your brains here, Sony has definetly thought about that. I'm going to guess its going to be between a Game Gear and Atari Lynx in size.
A portable with a 4.5 inch screen being just slightly bigger than a Game Gear? Ha. I'll believe it when I see it. Of course it won't be unreasonably big, but it will be a lot larger than the GBA SP. The SP is 6 inches long unfolded. Almost as big as the PSP's screen. What you don't realize is that Sony doesn't *really* care how big the PSP is just as long as it is portable. Their selling point will have to be power and image, because that is where the Nintendo is most "vulnerable", even if their next handheld addresses those issues.
Post by: VariantX on July 31, 2003, 10:37:06 AM
I would expect something in between n64 and DC at best. If they get this thing to have a battery life longer than 3 hrs and cooler than 2000 degrees farenheit then ill tip my hat to them.
Post by: boggy b on July 31, 2003, 11:30:40 AM
What does it matter anyway, as long as the games are good?
Post by: mouse_clicker on July 31, 2003, 12:03:45 PM
Very true, but it shows that Sony would decieve people to get sales rather than advertise what they should be advertising, the games. t's a horrible trend and unfortunately one that works. When people like Nintendo are honest, they're ignored.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on July 31, 2003, 03:46:17 PM
Post by: HiTmaN on July 31, 2003, 04:23:53 PM
Post by: aoi tsuki on July 31, 2003, 06:27:43 PM
Quote
A portable with a 4.5 inch screen being just slightly bigger than a Game Gear? Ha. I'll believe it when I see it. Of course it won't be unreasonably big, but it will be a lot larger than the GBA SP. The SP is 6 inches long unfolded. Almost as big as the PSP's screen. What you don't realize is that Sony doesn't *really* care how big the PSP is just as long as it is portable. Their selling point will have to be power and image, because that is where the Nintendo is most "vulnerable", even if their next handheld addresses those issues.
And Sony released screen size info where?
Post by: Uglydot on July 31, 2003, 07:58:12 PM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on July 31, 2003, 08:04:57 PM
Oh well.....
You know, why don't Sony just make a bloody laptop and call it the PSP?
It would be a whole lot easier than making up BS specs, cramming the whole chipset into a six inch thick steel casing (with an industrial-power fan) to keep it from burning the user's hands at Earth-core temperatures, using a power source that needs more energy than all the world's nuclear power plants can supply, bragging that the thing has a screen bigger than most rear projection TVs, and using more money than Bill Gate's adult movie bank account to market the damn thing only to tech heads who think that this is the Second Coming.
Is what i said a bit of an exaggeration?
Please.....Sony has come up with bigger BS than this.
Post by: joeamis on July 31, 2003, 09:45:54 PM
claiming that the PSP textures will resemble N64's going by ram alone would make sense, but if you take into account the bandwith speed for accessing the ram, then PSP outperforms N64 so staggering it is just downright silly to even compare them.
RAM BANDWITH COMPARISON: (know this: 1024 Megabytes = 1 Gigabyte)
PSP memory bandwidth of 2.6 Gigabytes per second
N64 memory bandwidth of: maximum 4,500M bit/sec. (that is megabits, not megabytes...)
also PSP's graphics processer has 2 Megabytes of VRAM
bandwidth of 5.3 Gigabytes per second
going by this data, the texture quality of the PSP should be close to that of Dreamcast.
The PSP could completely destroy GBA but will probably appeal to a more tech-savvy older crowed interested in the other features as much/or more than using it for games...thereby leaving the GBA and it's succesor as competent game machines in a different marketplace.
the issue with PSP is battery life and price. I see it costing $250.
With the highend processors, laser for reading discs, motor for spinning discs, high resolution screen, etc; the lithium ion battery included will probably result in 5 hrs or less of playtime before recharging.
Post by: boggy b on August 01, 2003, 02:18:28 AM
Quote
boggy, chairmansteve is not the most knowledgable person on the face of earth by a long shot, so take his opinion with a grain of salt.
Ha, a fellow PVC Forum goer (don't take that like it sounds!).
Nom CS is not the most knowledgable person on the face of the planet; I could name several people who know more about semi-conductores than him (I happen to know the architect of the RISC processor, and a person who's been in the industry for 40 years). However, he does not like PlayStation or Sony. Therefore I am already taking his estimates with a grain of salt. Who are you at PVC BTW?
Post by: Uglydot on August 01, 2003, 03:28:35 AM
Post by: Clonester on August 01, 2003, 05:50:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: aoi tsukiAnd Sony released screen size info where?
Gamespot stated that the screen would be 4.5 inches. Whether that is right or not I don't know. Gamespot also says that the PSP will feature a 16:9-format widescreen TFT LCD (480x272 pixels, 24-bit full color) screen. They actually have quite a lot of info on the machine.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on August 01, 2003, 08:28:58 AM
Post by: joeamis on August 01, 2003, 02:43:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Uglydot
Battery life has always been a big thing for me. When I play a system, I really like to play for a long time, pretty much all day. I go in spurts of playing my GBA non-stop, at least when I could afford games/pc parts/and GCN games. The GBA allowed me to do this. The PSP doesn't seem to. Now, if the battery had a high speed way of recharging, i.e. an hour or so then it was ready for a nice long play, then perhaps I would still invest. Which, by 2004, perhaps that will happen, who knows...
If you like to play GBA all day, I take it that you aren't spending all that time in a car or away from standard home electricity... so all you would need is an AC adapter for your PSP if you're concerned about battery life, unless there's something more to your situation?
The GBA does allow us to play all day non stop because it uses AA batteries. But what about the GBA SP, I have original GBA, and GBA SP uses lithium rechargeables so you would have to wait for those to charge too...unless GBA SP also lets you use AA batteries too. Does GBA SP let you use AA batteries too or just the included lithium rechargeables? Ofcourse if you are around your home when you play, the AC adapter negates this whole situation as well.
Post by: HiTmaN on August 01, 2003, 04:48:40 PM
Post by: boggy b on August 02, 2003, 03:15:25 PM
Read for an anaylsis of PSP performance. May not be accurate.
Post by: joeamis on August 02, 2003, 04:51:41 PM
psp textures will be equal to that of dreamcast
anyone see why this won't be the case?
Post by: MadMan on August 02, 2003, 05:29:48 PM
Post by: kennyb27 on August 02, 2003, 06:53:02 PM
QuoteYeah, it is. Like mouse_clicker said, Rogue Leader produced some 15 mps and that's the most on any console to date.
33m polygons per second isn't really that great.
To give an idea of how that figure my drop, just compare it to something like what Microsoft claimed Xbox could pull off: 225 mps. It hasn't even come within 215 mps of that.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 02, 2003, 07:11:34 PM
Post by: Uglydot on August 02, 2003, 09:25:35 PM
Also, those peak ppm are probably like the PS2s: flat, shaded and all the same shape.
Post by: joeamis on August 02, 2003, 10:23:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MadMan
Because (like the PS2) it will have amazing specs that should blow the competition out of the water, but they use the worst, cruddiest, most unwieldy design for the innards, that they probably won't even be able to get N64 graphics out of it.
well until someone can come up with some concrete evidence regarding the specs not even equaling n64 graphics i can't concure with you one bit.
saying it won't even equal n64 graphics, even if the psp specs are very highly exagerrated is just flame to me. even if the psp specs turn out to be 1/10 of what they currently are it will still be more powerful than n64.
uglydot- that is a unique situation, it sounds like your best bet is to invest in a rechargeable hook up for your gba and future portable systems, trust me here.... it saved my game gear from being trash.
Post by: Uglydot on August 02, 2003, 10:40:49 PM
Post by: joeamis on August 02, 2003, 11:29:10 PM
hehehe, sony already has a line of batteries hehehe
alkaline and rechargeables
Post by: boggy b on August 03, 2003, 02:47:51 AM
Post by: Bartman3010 on August 04, 2003, 02:52:15 AM
Anyway, this still cant work. But I guess they'll have some sort of rechargable battery they'll build into the system to make it last longer, but thats just a far out guess. I think that the PSP is full of empty promises, and Sony will only show off half of what they planned. Also, calling it a Playstation Portable is okay, I probably would've got one if it could play the old Playstation games. Especially since the PS2 can play the old PSX games. But apparently all we're gonna get a bunch of PSX ports like Crash Bandicoot Portable for $30.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 04, 2003, 04:34:28 AM
PSX.
Sony sure love the PS name.
I think the PSP will fail because of games.
It's bad enough that developers have to make 3D epics for the home consoles, but imagine having to do full ports for the bloody handheld!
Even though it's said to be as good as the N64 or Dreamcast, I still bet that having full 3D games on handhelds will only be possible thru some sort of hologram device that projects images as big as a 32cm TV (or like that new technology that was mentioned somewhere before).
It's cool and all that all the technology can be squeezed into a small(?) case, but the 3D graphics will be a problem. I don't doubt the developer power, nor the console's power. Only the games themselves.
With that new technology thing (forgot where it was), Nintendo should use that.
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 04, 2003, 04:51:01 AM
Quote
Sony sure love the PS name.
I think that's mainly to piss Nintendo off. It was originally Nintendo who thought up the name Playstation, and it's always been an impression of mine that Sony keeps it to annoy Nintendo.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 04, 2003, 05:22:20 AM
Post by: joeamis on August 04, 2003, 11:56:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Termin8Anakin
I think the PSP will fail because of games.
It's bad enough that developers have to make 3D epics for the home consoles, but imagine having to do full ports for the bloody handheld!
Even though it's said to be as good as the N64 or Dreamcast, I still bet that having full 3D games on handhelds will only be possible thru some sort of hologram device that projects images as big as a 32cm TV (or like that new technology that was mentioned somewhere before).
It's cool and all that all the technology can be squeezed into a small(?) case, but the 3D graphics will be a problem. I don't doubt the developer power, nor the console's power. Only the games themselves.
With that new technology thing (forgot where it was), Nintendo should use that.
actually GBA has some full 3d games, so why do we need holograms for a game to be 3d?
Don't you think that sony has done technical demos to simulate a 3d game working on a 4.5 inch size lcd screen, using PSP specs to run it? They would not be creating the PSP with 3d games in mind, without running tests on how games will perform using such technology.
You guys who despise the PSP, just seem to come up with a new reason why it won't work once your other reason can't fully prove it won't work.
Post by: boggy b on August 04, 2003, 01:08:17 PM
Also, I'd like to see proof that RS2 runs at 15mps and is constantly 60fps, because there's certainly a lot of slowdown, especially when there's too much on-screen at once.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 04, 2003, 08:57:07 PM
I'm just saying (well, I haven't said it before, but anyway) that 3D graphics on a small screen like that would be a little limited when it coems to detail.
Imagine trying to play Ocarina of Time on the GBA. Sure it's bloody cool that they could do it, but there are a number if small items that would go unnoticed, simply cause there is so much detail. Again, play Splinter Cell, and you'll notice that you are contsnatly in the dark. I have a hard time seeing things on my old 50cm TV (I have a 83cm), so imagine that darkness on a 4inch screen.......the amount of people with glasses would triple.
Post by: joeamis on August 04, 2003, 09:13:59 PM
It will be upto developers to make games that best utilize the hardware.
In that respect, and don't make important things to small to see.
i don't think anyone will make a game as dark as splinter cell because of
the small size of the screen.
this reminds me of when people complained about the size of the screen,
yelling 4.5 inches!? and i just said, it has to be that big for 3d graphics.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 04, 2003, 09:22:55 PM
If dark games like that will be too hard to see on a small screen, the 'only' 3D games that would really be well done on the PSP and I guess other future handhelds are happy, cutesy, bright games, like Mario or Rayman! Hahahaha, take THAT into account you blood, violent, explosion loving freaks!
Post by: Ymeegod on August 05, 2003, 12:30:39 PM
It wouldn't. The reason Dark games don't work with the GBA is because it's not backlit, hell even the GBA SP is only front lit.
The PSP is going be backlit so you really don't have much to worry about.
The big issue is the compact mini-dvd disc player durability. Moving parts on a portable might cause alot of issues.
But a few folks at EB were trying to explain that the disc's themselves are going be encoded in a plastic case (think of a modern day flobby drive). Which is kinda neat. Always hate little nicks are scratches on my DVD's hopefully someone would create some type of cases for them as well (Anyone recall those Mac's CD tray).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on August 05, 2003, 12:59:49 PM
More likely it will be frontlit.
As for the disk concept, what does that have to do with moving parts? the only thing that it will do is add one or two more moving parts...
Post by: KDR_11k on August 06, 2003, 12:51:10 AM
Sony focuses on power and features, while N prioritizes size and battery life over the rest. Nonetheless, the lifetime isn't important for most buyers (at least prior to buying) so N won't score with that.
So it depends on the games: Sony can't get GTA for the PSP, as GTA1&2 are on GBA and 3 won't run on the PSP (requires better hardware). While Nintendo currently scores with having the most popular franchises on the GBA (e.g. Pokemon). If sony can't deliver a "killer app" most people will reason that for USD200 they can get a full console and get one instead. Parents will more likely get their kids a GBA than a PSP, just because of the price.
boggy b: If the thing can handle 15mps, it can handle 15mps. Slow down would mean it had to draw more than 15mps. Millions per second is a unit that includes time, so it is irrelevant whether it's 15mps@60FPS or 15mps@30FPS. The latter just has more polies per frame.
Post by: joeamis on August 06, 2003, 02:17:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
So it depends on the games: Sony can't get GTA for the PSP, as GTA1&2 are on GBA and 3 won't run on the PSP (requires better hardware)
Sony can have GTA 1&2 for PSP, they're not exclusive to GBA like GTA 3&4 are to PS2.
But that's irrelevent anyways, noone will really be interested in GTA 1&2 by the time PSP comes out. GTA 3 could be ported to PSP and scaled down as far as graphics go. However, they will more likely make a new GTA for PSP, not port an old one. I wouldn't be surprised to see GTA PSP not long after PSP launches.
Post by: VideoGamerX on August 06, 2003, 02:29:26 PM
Here's how I feel about the PSP:
The screen? It'll be big enough. The size doesn't matter. It's a portable game player. That does NOT mean I have to be able to put it in my pocket. A book bag will suffice just like a carrying case for a laptop. With that said, the battery life can be dealt with appropriately since I just have to able to carry the PSP with me and play it either by holding it or whatever. I doubt it'll run on double A batteries or something.
The graphics? They'll be good enough to play enhanced Playstation games I hope. The textures just have to be flashy for a small screen. Will the game have Grand Theft Auto 3? You bet. It'll have some form of Grand Theft Auto in 3D form and it'll be kickass. They'll figure out some way to make it work even if it has to be GTA PSP (a PSP version). The graphics are not to be directly compared to a console or PC game, but they'll be good enough for fun portable 3D gaming, and the rest is really just to add to the hype.
The games? This is the biggest selling point. It has the Playstation brand name. People will buy this thing, rest assured! It's a guarantee. It will have games. That's a guarantee. Who wouldn't want to play PS1 games in portable form? For that matter, just think of the games that will be on this machine overall. That's all that's important. Think of portable wireless online RPGs...
I think we (the people at this board) will be the only ones sitting around worried about size, battery life, screen size, texture quality, and all that other googly gop while twenty million other gamers flock to the stores to pick up this baby.
Of course, we want competition against this thing. Nintendo is the one that really has to be smart. Sony can just toss out flaming heaps of electronic goodness and people will support it to a varying degree.
Post by: joeamis on August 06, 2003, 03:26:37 PM
actually the screen needs to be big for 3d games.
The screen sounds like it will be perfect at 4.5 inches.
The machine is far superior than PS1, even if it's specs turn out to be
much much much much much less than they are now.
Post by: Clonester on August 06, 2003, 05:26:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: joeamis
this reminds me of when people complained about the size of the screen, yelling 4.5 inches!? and i just said, it has to be that big for 3d graphics.
Were you talking about me? I wasn't complaining about the screen size at all. In fact, I wish the GBA had a bigger screen, though it certainly doesn't need it. It's nice to see the PSP having a large screen. What I was getting at is the fact that with such a large screen it will not be very portable unless Sony comes up with some sort of spectacular (or miraculous) design.
Post by: joeamis on August 07, 2003, 11:46:46 AM
than have the console 1-2 inches smaller with a 2.5 inch screen...
the system isn't going to be the size of a laptop so I don't see any problem
Post by: BlkPaladin on August 11, 2003, 01:01:22 PM
The games, price point, and comfort are also big.
There is no doubt that the machine will sell big at the begining, it depends on wheather they can deliver with all three of these areas weather it will continue as such.
Just ask Sega it was battery life that destroyed the Nomad, NeoGeo Pocket Color.
If a Lith-ion battery only last 90mins-to-2hours the interuption in gameplay will be too much for most gamers. It doesn't matter if you have to killer app to end all killer apps, if your battery runs dead because you are too engrossed in a game and you forget to save you can lose everthing you have done.
Post by: strikeagle on August 11, 2003, 03:55:19 PM
polygons? that simply isnt true. that would make it more powerful than Sega's Model 2 arcade board that drives Virtua Fighter 2 and Daytona USA, or Namco's System 22 board that drives Ridge Racer. N64 does more like 160,000 polygons with texture mapping and features on, not 900,000 or 600,000. maybe it does that many flat shaded, but not with texturing and FX.
As for the PSP, it looks like it is going to be roughly 1/2 has powerful as the PS2, with some graphics features that even PS2 does not have. that would make it at around 10-20 times more powerful than N64 at least. the PSP is going to be closer to Dreamcast
performance. In fact, more powerful than Dreamcast in most areas, except amount of memory.
PSP's pixel fillrate is over 600 million pixels/sec - that's more like GameCube's filllrate (648M pixels/sec) but since PSP has a lower resolution than GC, that will mean it has to fill less space, its like having more fillrate to work with.
And 33 million polygons/sec is likely a peak figure, much like PS2's 66M polygons. but that is a helluva lot more than N64's peak polygon rate, which is well under 1Mpps.
Post by: strikeagle on August 11, 2003, 05:26:22 PM
CPU Core
MIPS R4000 32-bit core
128-bit Bus
333MHz, 1.2V
8MB eDRAM main memory
2.6GB/sec Bus Bandwidth
I-Cache, D-Cache
2.6GFlops, FPU, VFPU (Vector Unit)
3D-CG extened instructions
Media Engine
MIPS R4000 32-bit core
333MHz, 1.2V
128-bit bus
2MB eDRAM sub memory
90nm CMOS manufacturing process
Graphics Core 1
2MB VRAM
5.3Gbps bus bandwidth
3D Curved Surface + 3D Polygon
Compressed Texture
Hardware Clipping, Morphing, Bone
Hardware Tessellator
Bezier, B-Spline (NURBS)
- reduce program, data,
- reduce memory footprint & bus traffic
Graphics Core 2
Rendering Engine + Surface Engine
256-bit bus, 166MHz, 1.2V
2MB VRAM
5.3Gbps bus bandwidth
664M pixels/sec fill rate
Max. 33M polygons / sec
24-bit full color
Sound Core
VME (Virtual Mobile Engine)
166MHz, 1.2V
128-bit bus
5 billion operations / second
3D Sound, 7.1 Channel
Support ATRAC3 Plus, AAC, MP3
Reconfigurable DSP engine
Media
UMD; Universal Media Disc, 60mm diameter
660nm Laser Diode
1.8GB Dual Layer
11Mbps transfer rate
Shock Proof
Secure ROM by AES
Unique Disc ID
Display
4.5" TFT LCD with 16:9 widescreen display
480 x 272 pixels, 24-bit full color
Communication
Wireless LAN (802.11) [Hotspots, Home Server, ...]
IrDA infrared wireless communication [PSP, Mobile Phone,...]
USB 2.0 [PSP, PS2, PC, ...]
Memory Stick
Controller
- directional pad, analog stick
- circle, cross, triangle, square, L1, R1, Start, Select buttons
Misc
MPEG4 AVC Decoder
Rechargeable Lithium ion battery
AV input / output
Headphone output
Launch Schedule Prototype: E3 2004 in May 2004
Title Lineup: Tokyo Game Show 2004
Worldwide Launch: Q4 2004
ProgrammingSimilar to the Original PlayStation
PSP Libraries
Middleware
Sample Code
Simple Programmable Field
* Media Engine and VME/AVE are not user programmable.
N64's fillrate is something well below 100M pixels/sec, probably like 30-40M pixels/sec - and N64's floating point performance is around 100 MFLOPs for the CPU and 100 MFLOPs for the RCP (graphics processor)
PSP's fillrate is 664M pixels/sec. and floating point performance is 2.6 GFLOPs.
Dreamcast has a 100M Pixel/sec fillrate and floating point performance of 1.4 GFLOPs.
GameCube's fillrate is 648M pixels/sec. so PSP not only has a higher raw pixel fillrate GC, it needs to use less because its screen is lower res than Gamecube's display on a tv, or that of any console.
In terms of polygon performance and fillrate, the PSP and Gamecube seem very close.
in fact, PSP is somewhat higher in both. GC's raw polygon spec is like 25 or 30M polygons (I forget the exact figure) PSP's is 33m polygons. pixel fill rate of PSP and GC seems nearly identical on paper, although Gamecube's fillrate includes trilinear filtering, dont know about PSP. even so, this is damn impressive for a handheld.
The only area where Dreamcast and Gamecube beat PSP is in amount of memory, but again, PSP will be more efficient because it needs to fill less pixels/less space, because of its smaller, lower resolution display compared to a 640x480 screen.
PSP is not only a massive, massive leap beyond GBA, its also a huge leap beyond N64, and conciderably more powerful than Dreamcast in most areas. PSP is closer to Gamecube than it is to N64.
And these are just raw specifications. not some over-blown hype. PSP is not God, its simply a powerful handheld. I have every reason to believe that Nintendo will surpass PSP with its own next-gen portable in 2004 or 2005.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on August 11, 2003, 05:35:55 PM
I have heard the logic you use by PS2 fanboys to no end. The PS2 in raw power is far more powerful than any other console, but it doesn't matter when it comes down to games.
Specs mean nothing when there isn't a way to judge how well they are implemented.
Post by: strikeagle on August 11, 2003, 05:48:17 PM
I am simply saying the PSP specifications are closer to current generation consoles than they are to N64.
Post by: ThePerm on August 11, 2003, 07:02:41 PM
omg look at teh psp!!!!! its so beutiful!!!!!
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 11, 2003, 09:08:06 PM
I want one! NOW!
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!!!!
It's soooo COOOL!
Everyone will be so jealous of me when i take this out of my pocket!!!
Post by: ThePerm on August 11, 2003, 09:12:26 PM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on August 12, 2003, 06:15:21 PM
Post by: Cap on August 13, 2003, 10:55:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: strikeagle
In terms of polygon performance and fillrate, the PSP and Gamecube seem very close.
in fact, PSP is somewhat higher in both. GC's raw polygon spec is like 25 or 30M polygons, a forget the exact figure. PSP is 33M. pixel fill rate seems nearly identical on paper, although Gamecube's fillrate includes trilinear filtering, dont know about PSP. even so, this is damn impressive for a handheld.
The only area where Dreamcast and Gamecube beat PSP is in amount of memory, but again, PSP will be more efficient because it needs to fill less pixels/less space, because of its smaller, lower resolution display compared to a 640x480 screen.
PSP is not only a massive, massive leap beyond GBA, its also a huge leap beyond N64, and conciderably more powerful than Dreamcast in most areas. PSP is closer to Gamecube than it is to N64.
And these are just raw specifications. not some over-blown hype. PSP is not God, its simply a powerful handheld. I have every reason to believe that Nintendo will surpass PSP with its own next-gen portable in 2004 or 2005.
while i dont know what gc's raw polygon specs would be, i know that they released realistic figures of 6-12 million polygons a second with all effects on. that number has already been surpassed by rogue leader at launch. the psp polygon numbers are as i understand it , theoretical, in that that would be the maximum number of polygons the system is capable of with NO effects. i'm only going on what i have read about both systems, so someone feel free to correct me if i'm wrong. i dont think the psp is anywhere near the gc in terms of power though, becouse wouldnt that put it on the same level as the ps2? didnt sony mention it will be capable of about 1.5 times the power of the ps1?
Post by: strikeagle on August 13, 2003, 09:57:52 PM
Quote
while i dont know what gc's raw polygon specs would be, i know that they released realistic figures of 6-12 million polygons a second with all effects on. that number has already been surpassed by rogue leader at launch. the psp polygon numbers are as i understand it , theoretical, in that that would be the maximum number of polygons the system is capable of with NO effects. i'm only going on what i have read about both systems, so someone feel free to correct me if i'm wrong. i dont think the psp is anywhere near the gc in terms of power though, becouse wouldnt that put it on the same level as the ps2? didnt sony mention it will be capable of about 1.5 times the power of the ps1?
You're not reading what I said or understanding it completely.
Again,
PSP seems to be around 1/2 has powerful as PS2. that is still MASSIVELY more powerful than PS1. While PSP is probably not really as powerful as the GameCube, it IS *miles* ahead of PS1 or N64. The PSP is more powerful than -Dreamcast- in every area except amount memory (PSP's memory is faster than DC's though!)--And Dreamcast is at least 10~15x more powerful than N64 or PS1.
N64's fp performance = 100~200 mflops - polygon rate: 160,000 with effects & textures
DC's fp performance = 1400 mflops - polygon rate: 3-5m with effects & textures
PSP's fp performance = 2600 mflops - polygon rate: 5-10m with effects & textures ????
I do realize PSP's 33m polygon per second rate is theoretical, much like PS2's 66m polygon rate. If PS2 gets 10-20m in actual games, PSP will probably get 5-10m pps. Even if PSP only got 3-4m pps, that would still be on par with Dreamcast and WAY ahead of PS1's 180,000 or N64's 160,000 pps (with texture & effects) .
btw, fyi, here is GameCube's polygon stats, including raw polygon rate. Information comes from cube.ign, and they got the information from Nintendo's official GameCube Hardware Overview documentation.
http://www.segatech.com/gamecube/overview/index.html
Polygon Rate
1 vertex color + 1 light + 1 texture - 20M polygons/sec
no vertex color + 1 texture - 26.4M polygons/sec
1 vertex color + no texture (gouraud shading) - 32M polygons/sec
Post by: Clonester on August 14, 2003, 05:19:25 AM
The PS2 realistically gets between 5 and 10 m polygons/sec, not 10-20 m. The Gamecube normally gets what Nintendo released, and that is 6-12 m polygons, with Rogue Leader getting 15m, the highest of any Game this system. According to Factor 5, it could be up to 20 m with RS3. I don't see the PSP pushing as much poly's as the PS2, so it is probably more like 3-5 m.
I wonder if the PSP will have some PS1 killer apps at launch, plus GTA3. If it does, I can see size, shape, and battery life not factoring in too much. Hardcore Sony fans and people who like GTA and the PS1 games will buy it, tell all their friends about it, and then they will in turn buy it with one game and let it sit on their shelves for years. Thus, the PSP becomes the next big thing, when in reality it is not getting a lot of playtime like the GBA would.
Even though the videogame industry has been rapidly growing over the past years, I don't know if it is necessarily a good thing that it has become mainstream. Some good games and consoles have been overlooked or unheard of by the masses, yet hardcore gamers play them hour after hour, day after day. Yet some rather poor games get hyped and they sell by the truckload, only to sit on people's shelves most of the time. But because those games sell well, the industry is then piled with similar games and more garbage, while developers turn away from creating the really fun and creative games because it is less lucrative. Image, hype, and graphics are driving the industry, not quality and creativity. I've only gone on this little rant because (I'm not bashing Sony) it seems that the mainstream floods to Sony and their Playstation name, and I don't really want the handheld industry becoming mainstream with the coming of the PSP. It seems for the most part handhelds have remained oblivious to the mainstream effects of their console cousins, and IMO it's probably for the better. Competition is fine, but I can only hope that the PSP doesn't bring handhelds mainstream.
Post by: The Doc on August 19, 2003, 10:04:11 AM
The Doc
Post by: manunited4eva22 on August 19, 2003, 11:24:33 AM
As for MSNBC, gee, they have so much credibility in the gaming news community.
Post by: Epitaph on August 19, 2003, 10:08:41 PM
Sorry for the spelling my maiden language is french so I suck at spelling in english.
Post by: joeamis on August 19, 2003, 10:28:12 PM
fact 1, nintendo's gb/gba is marketed towards younger people (look at the games on it and the fact that it's the size for your pocket)
fact 2, sony's psp is marketed to an older crowd
what it means: it won't have to be small enough to fit into a kid's pocket.
fact 3, battery life situation... Sony is not stupid enough to make the same mistake every company making a portable (besides Nintendo) made in the early 1990s.
what it means:
The PSP will have a battery life of atleast 5 hours, probably more like 10. If it would require 4 AA rechargeables or even 6 they will have this area covered, and you won't have to go out and buy more batteries each time...just recharge them with your system like the GBA SP, PROBLEM SOLVED...
also knowing Sony they will probably have some killer batteries (they've been making batteries and rechargeables for portable devices for many decades....)
fact 4, the games... what do companies love to do on GBA? Port SNES games on it, sometimes make them better too.
what it means:
what will companies love to do on PSP? Port PS1 games, and scaled down PS2 games.....
Final Fantasy 7-9 on PSP? Would not doubt this for a second.
Metal Gear Solid 1 on PSP? same...
Syphon Filter 1-2? yes...
Gran Turismo PSP (GT 2)? can you say, "in development"....
The PSP doesn't have to worry about having the "games", they are already there......
meaning to all this....the PSP is going to take the portable market by storm....
Am I upset that Nintendo's cash cow will become a skinny cow? Tremendously...
Am I glad that I will be able to play Gran Turismo PSP and a FF 7 portably? Very much so!
Would I rather have Nintendo have their cash cow than have those killer games for me to play? yes.
