Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
dead: I think in Gamespy's comparison, the DS won 5-3... Somehow they have now become pro-DS after being pro-PSP for a long time. Either they liked the E3 games so much or they're negotiating with Nintendo over something...
BTW, if anyone wants to compare consoles, use Soul Calibur 2 as an example.
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Sony already stated the PSP will be somewhat fragile... I smell desaster...
Quote
Originally posted by: ShaolinKilla
I was just stating what the sony rep told me, plus ive heard the same at some other sites.
On the other hand now that u mention it, that doesn't seem right at all. Even if u can listen to Mp3's for 10hrs that is kinda short for a Mp3 player and if that is short for an Mp3 player then the gameplay surely will suck alot more battery.
It really doesn't make any sense at all, I'm gonna laugh if the PSP only last 4-6hrs for gameplay, if the DS had anything near that i wouldn't buy it at all either. I wouldn't care how bad ass the system was if i could only use it for 4-6hrs! Even if the beautiful graphics could give me an mental orgasm of joy i wouldn't buy it if the batteries lasted 4-6hrs!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1
First off you are not gonna be playing mp3's off f any UMD unless you want Sony picking your songs for you and you paying for random mixes, UMD is not gonna be writable, you would be using the memory stick. Since the memory stick has no moving parts and you only need the screen temporarily to see what song you are currently picking/playing then you should use the least amount of power while playing music (how much processing power does it take to decode mp3's?)
The numbers I have heard for the PSP are:
2.5 hrs. - movies (disc is always spinning)
4-6 hrs. - games (depends on how much streaming is used in game)
10 hrs. - music (no disc use at all & very low processor usage)
Quote
Originally posted by: Blackknight131Quote
Eh, Shaolin, I doubt you can get more game than MP3 time unless the game consisted only of a black screen.
Ive been thinking about that too...I just instinctively figured that game applications would surely suck more juice overall than music apps...I mean, you got the big, bright n' beautiful screen, you have to power the UMD drive, and ya have to feed da need for the monster processor.
I think that if playing music off a UMD then certainly the drive would be used more than in say, most games....however does that alone equate to more juice drained?
Can anyone with some kind of experience or knowledge enlighten me on this?
And I wonder if SONY is frantically working on augmenting the battery in some way. It seems to be one of the top two fallacies of the PSP.
The other, of course, being that it perhaps mimicks the PS2 a little TOO closely...
-Blackknight131
Quote
Originally posted by: joeamis
Another reason I think Nintendo held back was because of development time and costs required for portable games. They are really the only company that has successfully supported both a console and portable (Sega to a much lesser degree), so they had to make it as easy as possible for them. Sure Nintendo could have released a portable more powerful than the GBA when it released at the time and still had the batteries be reasonable, especially if they included rechargeables like SP but making it comparable to SNES quality was the best decision because they were already familiar with developing for hardware at those specs and they could do remakes and ports of SNES titles as they have. I think that's the reason why everyone of their portables (minus the doomed Vboy) has basically had equivalent specs to everyone of their home consoles. It's really smart of them.
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"If you can have a game like Gran Turismo 4 at home with surround sound and wheel support, why in the world would you pay the same price for a portable version?"
This reminds me a lot of the current situation with arcades and I think this situation will eventually render the concept of a seperate portable game system obsolete. Arcades used to be huge as they should have been because they provided a gaming experience that couldn't be replicated at home. However eventually the home console hardware caught up to the arcades and there was little reason to spend money at the arcade when you could own your own copy of a perfect arcade port.
Portable gaming is going to go the same way though in this case the portable hardware catching up is going to render portables obsolete. It made sense for the Gameboy to have a different format than the NES and SNES because you couldn't accurately play NES and SNES games on a Gameboy. Instead they had to make non-colour games with less detailed graphics. We all accepted it though because it was worth playing these games because they were portable. However if the portable hardware is able to match the home console hardware and play the exact same games then a seperate portable hardware is not needed. Realistically they could just make a portable that plays the exact same games as the home console.
That's where the future is headed. Ten years from now Nintendo will uses a physically small form of media for it's games (like it's doing with the Cube) and will offer two models of the same hardware that play the same games. There will be the home version that connects to your TV and the portable version. All games will work on both machines and the really smart developers will incorporate features that allow you to increase the text size for when played on the portable and allow for both split screen multiplayer and the ability to hook up multiple systems (LAN basically).
In this future Sony's portable design is obsolete. Nintendo on the other hand has managed to create something that can't be accurately recreated on a home console and thus still has a reason to exist. The DS is like DDR in that it's a dated concept that is taken in a new direction that gives it a reason to exist. Nintendo has adapted to the future of portable gaming, Sony has not.
Quote
Originally posted by: PaleZer0
They are dirt cheap now. A good Linksys 802.11b wireless router can be had for 50 bucks.
Quote
Originally posted by: Smadte
I'm more interested in the PSP. The screens on the DS are too small and the touchscreen is just a hassle. I really don't want to play games with my hand constantly in the way of the screen. I'll stick to buttons, thankyouverymuch. The screen on the PSP is massive, and I really like that aspect. And the PSP blows DS out of the water when it comes down to graphics capabilities
LOL blow out of the water DS= dreamcast PSP = PS2 i do not consider that being BLOWN out of the water
. Niether of the handhelds have any games I'm currently interested in, really, but I still prefer the idea of having a PSP over the DS.
no games your are interested in, well stfu and dont get one if that is the case
I don't want any fanboy bashing, this is just my view on things. I still love Nintendo games,
if this is true, how come none of the games interest you.
I just think this DS thing is a mistake.
how
