Getting The PSP!

well i don't have enough money to get both, so im sticking exclusively to my DS on this one.

[Lkr]

I think i might have made up my mind. I think that there is an 89.5 chance that I WILL, listening ElementK, I WILL get the PSP, if i get the money.

[MlKE]

LOL. Mahjong, racing games, GTA... Sounds like a pretty original lineup for me. Even now, the DS already has Warioware Touched, Feel the Magic, Jam with the Band... all of which are in all likelihood more original than anything that will come out of the PSP.

I respect your opinion that the PSP is the better platform, but originality and innovation are going to be for the DS, not the PSP, by virtue of the input methods (touchscreen, microphone).

Let me explain this farther in depth. The DS, while it is a very innovative platform, but developers aren't looking for innovative platforms. They're looking for something easy to develop games on. Many 3rd party developers will create a game that barely uses the touch screen, or they'll take a game idea from a java game, that you use your mouse a lot, and you can use the stylus like a mouse (zookeeper comes very to mind). The DS just doesn't have the graphical capabilities that the PSP does

and innovation in the gaming world these days are coming from beautiful visuals. And give it time before sweet games come out for the PSP. Very VERY innovative games like Jak and Daxter and Ratchet and Clank didn't come out on the PS2 right away. From a developers standpoint, I would much rather make games for the PSP, seeing as how it's an easier platform to create games for, AND it also holds the interest of the common video game public these days. Because loving sweet graphics isn't a trend that's going to go away.

Because someone getting a DS must hate playing video games, right ? Please stop trolling.

you're twisting words. i said it like "if you like video games, then you want to play the system for the games, and if you get both systems, then you're able to play ever game you want to play." if he only got a DS, he would not have the full gaming experience that he could have. the same with the PSP.

man you must have a lot of money to burn. aren't Gizmondos priced at like 460? i think thats what my EGM said...

I work at an ice factory... and once the summer comes around, I average about 200 bucks a week. So i'll really have no trouble buying anything i want... but im going to wait for the gizmondo to get a couple better games announced before i really contemplate purchasing it. its a powerful pocket-pc style pda, but gaming-wise, it's not so hot. Age of Empires and Halo are the only games I might be interested in so far (and Halo is still a rumor, so it might not even come out..)

[CorwinB]

The DS just doesn't have the graphical capabilities that the PSP does and innovation in the gaming world these days are coming from beautiful visuals.

That would be true, except it doesn't. Even the so-called "revolution" of gaming those last years (GTA) features extremely crappy graphics. When was the last time better graphical capabilities led to new gameplay ? It was back in the PS1 and N64 days, when the shift to 3D and analog control opened new design possibilities (Mario 64 is a good example on the N64 (3D platforming and analog control), and FF7 is a good example on the PS1, with an old-fashioned RPG engine being fleshed out by the cinematic experience made possible by larger storage). Every innovation in gameplay since has come from either clever input methods (GBA-GC connectivity, Eye Toy...), better storyline/emotion (ICO) or better interactivity (GTA), perhaps better IA, but certainly not better graphics. If you have counterexamples, I'd be happy to hear them.

However much you want to downplay them, the DS brings new input methods which are a default innovation factor (you are right in saying that their use will depend on the developer, though), coupled with enough 3D power to make 3D gaming a reality (see Mario 64 DS). The PSP brings larger storage and better 3D graphics. Larger storage can bring a better and sometimes more innovative game experience (see FF7), but it remains to be seen if developers will be able to capitalize on this storage while keeping battery life and loading times in check (considering we are after all talking about a handheld console). Jury is still out on this one.

If the DS was only able to do GBA-like graphics, then you would be right, and the superior 3D graphics of the PSP would be able to bring significantly more innovative games. But that's not the case, and the difference will be cosmetic, not genre-defining (now, I can perfectly understand if someone really feels the better graphics are a must).

Input-wise, the PSP vastly lags behind the DS, although my opinion would have been different had the unit been equipped with dual-analog controls (I can't understand why Sony didn't include them).

For example, an FPS on the DS is easy to do (see Metroid Hunters, where the touchscreen is used for aiming and for weapon switching/morphball) while maintaining a decent graphical quality, but on the PSP, all the graphical quality in the world won't compensate for the controls (left-hand aiming ? Yeew).

They're looking for something easy to develop games on.

And I'm not sure a platform where the developer is responsible for the battery mileage (Sony's words, not mine) is what they want. Plus development costs for the PSP are likely to be close to what they are for home consoles, so unless the sales are sky-high, the costs of an UMD will need to be close to what a console game costs.

Very VERY innovative games like Jak and Daxter and Ratchet and Clank didn't come out on the PS2 right away.

3D platformers ? That's innovative. Well, that was back in 1996.

From a developers standpoint, I would much rather make games for the PSP, seeing as how it's an easier platform to create games for, AND it also holds the interest of the common video game public these days.

See earlier, I'm not sure the PSP will be that much easier to develop for (battery life to keep in check, loading times, development costs...). For the DS, you can make a good game even if you use the touchscreen for basic duties (map, inventory), analog control or mini-games. If you want to go more innovative with input, then the sky is the limit (FtM is an excellent example, and it's only a first-generation title).

Also if you look at some sales charts, it seems the DS is quite holding the interest of the common video game public these days... :)

you're twisting words.

I'm not twisting words. You are trying to give another meaning to your initial sentence. Next time, if you intend to say "if he only got a DS, he would not have the full gaming experience that he could have. the same with the PSP.", say it, and not "But definately get the PSP, based on the fact that you enjoy playing video games.".

[Lkr]

Hey, my percentage has just taken a major increase. Talked with my mom, and I asked her if I could get it for my b-day! She said I could, as long as I wanted it. Now there is a solid 95% chance that I will get it. PSP here I come, but I am STILL a LOYAL NINTENDO FANBOY!

Originally Posted by CorwinB

See earlier, I'm not sure the PSP will be that much easier to develop for (battery life to keep in check, loading times, development costs...). For the DS, you can make a good game even if you use the touchscreen for basic duties (map, inventory), analog control or mini-games. If you want to go more innovative with input, then the sky is the limit (FtM is an excellent example, and it's only a first-generation title).

Also if you look at some sales charts, it seems the DS is quite holding the interest of the common video game public these days... :)

I'm going to agree with you on this point. There is NO WAY that the PSP is a much easier platform to develop for. If you're in the know, the PS2 is the hardest current generation console to program games for. Not to say that it is extremely hard, but it feels that way in comparison to the Xbox and GameCube. Not only that, but Sony charges very high premiums for developing games on their systems. Let's look at the GBA: VERY easy platform to develop on. That is how it has always been, even with its predecessors. Now, let's look at the DS and the PSP. With the DS, developing games is relatively cheaper (game cards), and the developers need not worry about battery life. With the PSP, the UMD's don't exactly come cheap (again, in comparison to the DS' game cards) and the production values are getting close to that of home consoles. This leaves out some of the smaller companies who have been developing handheld games easily and for a decent price.

So, now we're expecting them to just immediately turn over and choose between two sides. For the much larger companies (EA), money is no object, so they would have no problem developing games for the PSP AND the DS. In no way am I comparing the DS and PSP as far as handheld competitors, I'm just stating that you have to figure in costs when amking games, which will probably skyrocket the prices for games for [both] handhelds. Not bashing the PSP (I personally love the machine as much as my DS), just saying what it would cost.

*I just felt like typing today... lol*

[Pilot_51]

Corwin and tehdsdude, well said, I couldn't agree more.
Easy developing isn't always the best choice, take a one sided example where you develop a game where you move a pixel around the screen and nothing else and compare to any other game, one is obviously easier, but the other will sell a lot more. I'm not saying easy is always the wrong choice, I believe what you guys say that the DS is easier to develop for, just look at the quality of the games made in such a short period, the control options of the DS make it a very playable system compared to just about every other system besides PC.

Originally Posted by MlKE

Age of Empires and Halo are the only games I might be interested in so far (and Halo is still a rumor, so it might not even come out..)

Funny thing you mention that, I was thinking about AoE while reading your post before I got to that part and was surprised you mentioned it. My dad got AoE for his iPaq a couple days ago which sparked most of the family installing AoE on PC and playing multiplayer. When I saw AoE in action on the iPaq, the graphics and sounds were identical to PC (not the music though, which was GBA quality), then I realized it would be perfect on the DS if only Microsoft (or maybe Rare if they can do that) would do that. If not AoE, I'd like to see something similar to it, and can't forget multiplayer (AoE for PC supports 8 players, DS could double that if it's appropriate for the game).

[MlKE]

I'm not twisting words. You are trying to give another meaning to your initial sentence. Next time, if you intend to say "if he only got a DS, he would not have the full gaming experience that he could have. the same with the PSP.", say it, and not "But definately get the PSP, based on the fact that you enjoy playing video games.".

you're right, i forgot what i said.

i can't find it, but magicbox asked a lot of developers (after dev-kits were released for both systems) which system they thought was easier to develop on, and which system they thought would be more innovative game-wise. The PSP won both of those. Granted, the DS won the innovative hardware, i know you guys love the ds a lot, but the psp is going to get different games. It's going to get the really strange games. It's going to be like the PS2, but littler. The DS will get innovation, but primarily only from Nintendo itself. Developers simply won't want to have to deal with all the crap Nintendo put in the DS.

Nintendo has really been making bad decisions when it comes to hardware recently. they continued with cartridges, when cds were far cheaper to make, They use mini-discs instead of dvds, which hold far more information. They refused to go online with the gamecube. And now they've made a handheld system that has two screens..

Games are where it counts, not hardware, and Nintendo really needs to realize that, because even though they're still hugely popular, if they continue with this trend, they're going to destroy themselves.

[Pilot_51]

It's not easy to make truely innovative games without innovative hardware, Nintendo did a good job at that.
If carts stay alive and kicking, they'll probably surpass disks memory vs. physical space, they're catching up really fast while disks are moving along rather slowly as far as I can tell. Disks are also a lot easier to scratch, break, and get dirty, while carts need practically no care whatsoever other than the fact they're so compact that they're easy to lose. Carts are also getting cheaper and easier to slap software into, and they can improve the storage technology while disks would usually need a new drive to read a disk with more storage. The one thing that Nintendo made a rather bad choice is the online function, probably because the GCN was still targetted for the younger crowd when it was released and they figured parents wouldn't want them talking smack with people they didn't know. Nintendo is finally in its growth spurt, coming out with online multiplayer and more mature games, third parties are taking games way up with games like Resident Evil 4 (Nintendo promoted it at E3 if you didn't notice).
You talk like DS and all the innovative hardware is crap, like a PSP fanboy talks... Two screens are better than one, it's quite obvious since there's the option to use only one screen. Nintendo realizes that a system can't be good without good games, that's why they make games like Mario and Metroid. Give the developers some time and they'll be making games that surpass the quality of Nintendo's own games, and with time comes things like better graphics engines and sound (GBA is a great example of that). I don't see an end to Nintendo anywhere in sight.
I don't mean to bash the PSP or Sony, but I don't see what can truely improve on the PSP other than maybe graphics and game features, and unfortunately with all the money I'm sure they're losing I can see an end.

[CorwinB]

It's going to be like the PS2, but littler.

And the PS2 has one of the most clicheed and uninspired line-up of games ever (not to say it's a bad console, I've one and I like it, just one with not many original titles). Only the sheer quantity of games makes it possible for it to have a handful of games that are not sequels or clones of an already established concept.

Look at what's announced for both the PSP and the DS : the PSP has (extremely good-looking, I might add) sport games, fighting game, a survival horror game, mahjong/puzzle/casino games... The DS already has much more innovative titles out and coming (FtM, Wario Ware Touched, Jam with the Band...), and that's the tip of the iceberg. Now, I readily understand people preferring the PSP lineup (both current and upcoming), but saying it's more innovative is, simply put, denial.

You have yet to put forward a single counter-example to my earlier point that the last time better graphics/storage led to truly innovative gameplay was in the N64/PS1 days. The only additional example I can think of is Shenmue on the Dreamcast.

The DS will get innovation, but primarily only from Nintendo itself.

And Nintendo has been consistently pumping innovative titles on all their platforms for how long now ? 20 years ? And that's forgetting all the 2nd and 3d party development houses that are probably drooling over a system were the next Pokemon will appear. Add to that Nintendo starting to license their huge hit-making characters to other developers for the less innovative titles (Capcom developing GBC/GBA Zelda, Sega making F-Zero, Namco making the new Starfox...), and you can see Nintendo focusing on innovative game/hardware design, while still gathering huge revenues from their established brands.

Developers simply won't want to have to deal with all the crap Nintendo put in the DS.

I'm sure they are all thrilled to have to be blamed for low battery life (Sony's comment was "battery life on the PSP depends on the developer", or in other words "blame them not us") and deal with loading times instead. Really.

But anyway developers won't have to use all the features of the DS to make good (and innovative) games. If you look at the current line-up, a couple of games use the microphone, most don't. Some games use the touchscreen in an extensive manner, others don't. Some games will use the 2nd screen for nothing but map and inventory duties, other will use it for true 2 screen gameplay (with or without using the touchscreen). Vertical shooter on the DS ? Bet we will see some (Ikaruga DS, now that would be great). Some games are full 3D, others are not.

Meanwhile, every developer on PSP will have to deal with increased development costs (because to sell well a game will have to compete with Square and EA, which have money to pour into CG cutscenes and such costly features), keeping battery life issues in check, and loading times.

Anyway, thanks for once again making your bias shine for everyone to see ("all the crap Nintendo put in the DS", way to go, Mike !).

Games are where it counts, not hardware, and Nintendo really needs to realize that, because even though they're still hugely popular, if they continue with this trend, they're going to destroy themselves.

Doomsayers have been saying that since the N64 days and have been wrong ever since... Nintendo has consistenly won money since, and continues doing so. True, they appeal to a certain "niche" market (although a very large niche), while Sony and MS go for a larger user base, but Nintendo's strategy really is paying off (they are winning lots of money on software mostly because of their hugely successful first party licences, and they are either winning a bit or not losing much on hardware). Strange how when Nintendo made a single negative results quarter (mostly because of a low dollar compared to the yen) it was the proverbial "writing on the wall" for the so-called "journalists" on IGN and the like and Nintendo had to "adapt to the new realities of the gaming market" and beg Rockstar on their knees to have GTA on the Cube (because that's what "adapting to the new realities of the gaming market" means, having a game where you can beat the crap out of hookers), but when Sony Entertainment or MS Games Division lose millions upon millions quarter after quarter it's "business as usual" and "no need to worry, eventually they will turn a profit". Nintendo has a solid formula that works both for their target markets and financially.

Nintendo has really been making bad decisions when it comes to hardware recently. they continued with cartridges, when cds were far cheaper to make,

What was the ratio of pirated to legit software on PS1 already ? Selling hardware at a loss and then not selling games for it because people pirate them sounds like a great way to gain money for me... With their consoles, Sony found a great way to build a very large user base (and I commend them for that, it was not easy for a newcomer to this market, and becoming leader in a few years is impressive, no doubt), but not to make it very profitable (for. Worldwide, MS is lagging behind both Nintendo (although they do better in the US) and Sony, and lose even more money.

They use mini-discs instead of dvds, which hold far more information.

And if everything you use this information for is atrocious voice-acting and CG cutscenes that send development costs through the roof, what's the use as far as gameplay is concerned ? So innovative hardware doesn't count for making better/more innovative game, but larger storage is a sure way to do it ? One of my favorite games on PS2 is Guilty Gear X, it's on CD not DVD... Additionally the MD on the NGC can hold its own, and if needed a developer can include a couple of those in the box (see RE Rebirth or RE Zero), just like it was the case on PS1. 1.8GB is more than enough for a full game, everything extra is generally video. Yes, on multi-platform games (the various Lord of the Rings games come to mind), video scenes on the Cube will look worse than on the PS2 or XBox. The storage capacity ratio argument held some water back in the N64/PS1 days, but now it mostly boils down to the amount of voice acting and of video. Game content, texture quality... don't have to suffer because of the storage on the Cube. I'm not saying CG, videos, and voice acting are bad things, just that they are in no way necessary to good gameplay.

They refused to go online with the gamecube.

False. They made the hardware available (both dial-up modem and broadband adapter), and chose to let developers do what they want with regard to online gaming. Exactly like Sony did with the PS2. Only MS has a full-fledged online plan (Live).

And now they've made a handheld system that has two screens..

And what's your point ? You don't like the idea of a handheld system with 2 screens, very well, that's your right and I respect your opinion although I do not share it. But don't turn your personal opinion into a "proof" that Nintendo has been making bad decisions with regards to hardware. That's fanboy talk, not logical argumentation.

Regarding the constant bashing of cartridges, to put the issue to rest :
- production cost is a non-issue to the consumer, only sale cost is (you can't have it one way with regard to the PSP hardware cost and another way with regard to disk/cartridge costs). Due to development costs, PSP games are likely to cost the same or probably more than DS games (mark my words).
- for handhelds, cartridges have huge advantages in terms of reliability, loading times, and battery consumption.
- cartridges can have an extended set of features. Games like Boktai (another innovative 3d party game, I might add), Warioware Twisted or Yoshi Universal Gravitation could never appear on a device like the PSP for example.
- cartridges can have their own saving space, making a memory card useless

I mean, one could easily say :
"Sony has really been making bad decisions when it comes to the PSP hardware. They went with a disc-based media which has huge battery consumption and reliability issues while cartridges are fare more reliable, consume less, and can offer additional features. They forgot dual analogic controls, which will make entire genres like FPS difficult to pull off for developers. They went for graphics at all costs and refused to consider battery life, instead putting the burden on developers. And now they have made a handheld system with a single screen..."

See how it looks when one focuses only on the negative sides of a given piece of hardware while forgetting the positive (in the case of the PSP, multimedia capacities, superb screen, huge 3D power) ? I can understand and respect your preference for the PSP, but please stop resorting to fallacies and strawmen arguments to try forcing your personal opinion down other people's throats...