The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well, the DS has been shown, whoopee, I bet Dringo wet his pants this afternoon.
So, anyway, this dual screen malarky, revolutionary? A brilliant change to the way games are played by the industry?
Well, guess what, I don't agree, and I'm going to be called a Sony fanboy, or at very best, an anti-Nintendo zealot for it ;)
Anyway, here's my gripe, there's nothing revolutionrary about the DS what-so-ever. People are talking as though they have never seen dual screen hardware in gamers lifetime, well, I hate to dissapoint you all, but the dual screen handheld format was tried, tested and loved by us golden oldies a little short of 20 years ago.
[URL]http://www.infa.abo.fi/~buck/misc/gizmos/pix/nintendo.game+watch.mickey+donald.open.jpg[/URL]
This picture shows a NINTENDO Game And Watch handheld single game device from almost TWENTY years ago.
[URL]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/12/nintendo_ds_comms/[/URL]
This image shows an almost identical looking handheld game platform, released by the very same company, but claim this dual screen arhitecture to be new, revolutionary, and well, good.
I'm not saying there may be some niche elements available to gamers, but I feel that most games developers will not use the additional screen for anything useful. Football games will have a top down radar, metroid will have a map, mario kart will have the track and player positions, basically world information about locations and the layout of the world will be used on this screen.
There is a good reason for this too, people can only concentrate their vision to a single focal point at a time. No one can concentrate on both of those screens at the same time, so one screen will be used for gameplay, and the other for displaying information.
This is a good thing given the paltry size of the DS screen, it means the game screen can be uncluttered with HUDs and the like but concentrate solely on letting the player play the game.
I will be truely amazed if anyone on this forum can come up with an original gameplay dynamic which could actively use the two screens of the DS in a way that could not be done on a single screen.
I'm even thinking of having, say, a heat sensor camera on the top screen, and a normal view on the bottom. This would be done MORE effectively on a single screen as a current day frame rate is at a higher reresh rate then the ability of a person to change their point of focus from one screen to the other. Sinply hitting a button to change views whilst focusing on a single point is a more natural way of playing a game.
So, I suppose I have set myself up for a fight by challenging the might of Ninetndo, again, but surely there are more innovative things happening in the world of gaming than a twenty year old handheld design being rereleased to a massive fanfare with no clear cut example of how this creates a revolution.
Nintendo should be commended for spinning up some dust to hide Sony's far nore impressive PSP handheld entertainment device.
The PSP is much more of a students system, good games, good movies, good sounds, wireless and one decent big widescreen which will let people who commute, or like to enjoy the comforts of their bedroom in some glorious sunshine.
The DS is not a gaming revolution, it's a bit like 90s pop music, a remix of something old people liked twenty years ago, just with more colours and more marketing hype. Take the DS with a pinch of salt, it's not worth the hype.
So, anyway, this dual screen malarky, revolutionary? A brilliant change to the way games are played by the industry?
Well, guess what, I don't agree, and I'm going to be called a Sony fanboy, or at very best, an anti-Nintendo zealot for it ;)
Anyway, here's my gripe, there's nothing revolutionrary about the DS what-so-ever. People are talking as though they have never seen dual screen hardware in gamers lifetime, well, I hate to dissapoint you all, but the dual screen handheld format was tried, tested and loved by us golden oldies a little short of 20 years ago.
[URL]http://www.infa.abo.fi/~buck/misc/gizmos/pix/nintendo.game+watch.mickey+donald.open.jpg[/URL]
This picture shows a NINTENDO Game And Watch handheld single game device from almost TWENTY years ago.
[URL]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/12/nintendo_ds_comms/[/URL]
This image shows an almost identical looking handheld game platform, released by the very same company, but claim this dual screen arhitecture to be new, revolutionary, and well, good.
I'm not saying there may be some niche elements available to gamers, but I feel that most games developers will not use the additional screen for anything useful. Football games will have a top down radar, metroid will have a map, mario kart will have the track and player positions, basically world information about locations and the layout of the world will be used on this screen.
There is a good reason for this too, people can only concentrate their vision to a single focal point at a time. No one can concentrate on both of those screens at the same time, so one screen will be used for gameplay, and the other for displaying information.
This is a good thing given the paltry size of the DS screen, it means the game screen can be uncluttered with HUDs and the like but concentrate solely on letting the player play the game.
I will be truely amazed if anyone on this forum can come up with an original gameplay dynamic which could actively use the two screens of the DS in a way that could not be done on a single screen.
I'm even thinking of having, say, a heat sensor camera on the top screen, and a normal view on the bottom. This would be done MORE effectively on a single screen as a current day frame rate is at a higher reresh rate then the ability of a person to change their point of focus from one screen to the other. Sinply hitting a button to change views whilst focusing on a single point is a more natural way of playing a game.
So, I suppose I have set myself up for a fight by challenging the might of Ninetndo, again, but surely there are more innovative things happening in the world of gaming than a twenty year old handheld design being rereleased to a massive fanfare with no clear cut example of how this creates a revolution.
Nintendo should be commended for spinning up some dust to hide Sony's far nore impressive PSP handheld entertainment device.
The PSP is much more of a students system, good games, good movies, good sounds, wireless and one decent big widescreen which will let people who commute, or like to enjoy the comforts of their bedroom in some glorious sunshine.
The DS is not a gaming revolution, it's a bit like 90s pop music, a remix of something old people liked twenty years ago, just with more colours and more marketing hype. Take the DS with a pinch of salt, it's not worth the hype.
Page:
gerrid wrote:
> Show me some solid facts from your posts, and then I will believe you.
>
>
> I bet you can't find any though.
Solid facts for what??
The PSP capabilities are fact.
The DS games using the dual screen only show top down maps, take a look at Mario and Metroid, Nintendo's two big launch properties.
And the links take you to pictures of the Game And Watch, which btw, was released in 1982 in the states, making the handheld dual screen system over 20 years old, not new.
> Show me some solid facts from your posts, and then I will believe you.
>
>
> I bet you can't find any though.
Solid facts for what??
The PSP capabilities are fact.
The DS games using the dual screen only show top down maps, take a look at Mario and Metroid, Nintendo's two big launch properties.
And the links take you to pictures of the Game And Watch, which btw, was released in 1982 in the states, making the handheld dual screen system over 20 years old, not new.
Your assumption that the DS is not innovative is based on a series of 2 minues promotional films. You have no idea how any of the games work, no one except those at E3 do yet, everything is just assumptions.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Any handheld that has Mario 64 and Animal Crossing on it from launch
> day is definetly worth the hype.
Right, this post is a gripe at Nintendo claiming to be innovative, as the title claims, so, I have no issues with those games, but they definately aren't conveying the NEW way of playing games that Nintendo hyped the DS to be.
> Any handheld that has Mario 64 and Animal Crossing on it from launch
> day is definetly worth the hype.
Right, this post is a gripe at Nintendo claiming to be innovative, as the title claims, so, I have no issues with those games, but they definately aren't conveying the NEW way of playing games that Nintendo hyped the DS to be.
Show me some solid facts from your posts, and then I will believe you.
I bet you can't find any though.
I bet you can't find any though.
Revolutionary or not, the DS looks excellent. Whether you like it or not is your preference. The touch screen and also the second screen seem like a bit of a gimmick at the moment, just have to wait and see what Nintendo have planned for them.
Any handheld that has Mario 64 and Animal Crossing on it from launch day is definetly worth the hype.
Anyone know how much the PSP is gonna cost by the way?
Any handheld that has Mario 64 and Animal Crossing on it from launch day is definetly worth the hype.
Anyone know how much the PSP is gonna cost by the way?
gerrid wrote:
> I'm sorry but you're making wild assumptions left right and centre.
What assumptions?? show me, don't just dance around it.
> And your argument has already been discounted.
Where?? Because you said that it has a touch screen? I don't agree, and my post makes a valid point as to why, if you can't discount it, don't throw out of hand comments.
> I'm sorry but you're making wild assumptions left right and centre.
What assumptions?? show me, don't just dance around it.
> And your argument has already been discounted.
Where?? Because you said that it has a touch screen? I don't agree, and my post makes a valid point as to why, if you can't discount it, don't throw out of hand comments.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Voice recognition as well.
>
> You haven't even seen how the games use the 2 screens and you're
> acting like you know it all. Your post is laughable and the fact that
> you spend your time writing things like this is even more amusing.
If that's all you've got to say on the matter, why bother wasting forum storage space.
Make a decent point as to why what I said was wrong, or come up with some ways that the DS could actually be useful.
Voice Recognition is software based, not hardware, allthe hardware needs is a full dublex sound and a microphone, software then decodes the messages, and voice recognition will only be implemente dif individual games want it.
Granted it could be good for Starfox to issue orders to team mates, but what else can the DS do that's worthwhile or new?
> Voice recognition as well.
>
> You haven't even seen how the games use the 2 screens and you're
> acting like you know it all. Your post is laughable and the fact that
> you spend your time writing things like this is even more amusing.
If that's all you've got to say on the matter, why bother wasting forum storage space.
Make a decent point as to why what I said was wrong, or come up with some ways that the DS could actually be useful.
Voice Recognition is software based, not hardware, allthe hardware needs is a full dublex sound and a microphone, software then decodes the messages, and voice recognition will only be implemente dif individual games want it.
Granted it could be good for Starfox to issue orders to team mates, but what else can the DS do that's worthwhile or new?
I'm sorry but you're making wild assumptions left right and centre.
And your argument has already been discounted.
And your argument has already been discounted.
Voice recognition as well.
You haven't even seen how the games use the 2 screens and you're acting like you know it all. Your post is laughable and the fact that you spend your time writing things like this is even more amusing.
You haven't even seen how the games use the 2 screens and you're acting like you know it all. Your post is laughable and the fact that you spend your time writing things like this is even more amusing.
gerrid wrote:
> Do you even know that the DS has a touch screen?
Yes, that's like having a mouse, but you don't have to move it around, you just push where you would normally click, what's your point? touch screen gaming means you need to take your fingers off of the buttons used for actions, meaning crappy touch screen games with big fingers, or slow paced games where you are expected to let the buttons go to push the screen, either way, not a gaming revolution, more of a nice way to get through menus without needing a knee based mouse pad.
> Do you even know that the DS has a touch screen?
Yes, that's like having a mouse, but you don't have to move it around, you just push where you would normally click, what's your point? touch screen gaming means you need to take your fingers off of the buttons used for actions, meaning crappy touch screen games with big fingers, or slow paced games where you are expected to let the buttons go to push the screen, either way, not a gaming revolution, more of a nice way to get through menus without needing a knee based mouse pad.
Page: