View Full Version : Gameboy should have been a Sony product? Help finding quote.
I'm writing an article on PSP and am having trouble remembering something I read years ago, maybe in Next Generation magazine, about a Sony executive chastising his team because "Gameboy should have been a Sony product."
Does anyone else remember this quote, or where I could find it today? I tried Googling and Yahooing, but no luck yet. I'd really like to avoid going through all my old issues of Next Gen, but I will if I have to.
If you can help, I'd be very grateful!
I FOUND IT!
Next Generation magazine, Volume 1, Issue 3, March 1995.
Damn, that was one great magazine... :shock:
cthellis42
13-May-2005, 16:51
Care to... um... include a link and the quote in some more context?
One of the reasons for Sony's reluctance to launch an all-out assault on the videogame market was Nintendo. Sony became increasingly intimidated by the Kyoto giant during the must successful years of the NES (1985-1988), and the company was further subdued by the arrival of Game Boy in 1989, which saw Nintendo encroaching on Sony territory.
Sony was so impressed with the design and performance of the low-cost handheld Game Boy that its main R&D team working on consumer portables was apparently chastised by its manager on the basis that "the Game Boy should have been a Sony product." According to David Sheff's definitive hisotry of Nintendo, Game Over, one engineer was so ashamed that he actually left the company.
Very interesting...
see colon
13-May-2005, 17:25
Sony was so impressed with the design and performance of the low-cost handheld Game Boy that its main R&D team working on consumer portables was apparently chastised by its manager on the basis that "the Game Boy should have been a Sony product."
so does sony consider the PSP low cost?
PSP is very low cost for what it does.
see colon
13-May-2005, 18:12
PSP is very low cost for what it does.
is it?
PSP is very low cost for what it does.
is it?
I think it's a good start.
Besides, Sony's on to something here.
They weren't looking to build just another portable games machine. They want the "Walkman of the 21st Century" - something that will reach far beyond the traditional portable games market. That means the addition of music, movies, photos, and possibly internet capabilities.
They're essentially creating a new market with PSP, as opposed to merely competing in an existing one. And because PSP is unique, yes, Sony can charge a higher price for it. (Though I'm not sure how much, if any, money they're actually making on each unit sold.)
So while for now, the price may be too high for most, the price will drop in time. It will become more affordable. Then the price will drop again. And in a few years, by the time PSP is selling for $129 or $99, Sony will have tapped into an untapped market, and they'll have just that much of a head start on competitors (I can just imagine a new model of iPod being drawn up right now).
Eventually, PSP 2 will fix some of the current unit's problems - by adding a hard drive, for example. And then the cycle will begin anew.
Boom - they've got their new "Walkman." Essentially by taking the Game Boy idea and expanding it with features that appeal to everyone.
Their whole approach reminds me a lot of how they got into the home console biz in the first place, only I think the "personal, portable media machine" market will ultimately prove to be a hell of a lot bigger.
Time will tell, but for the time being, I personally feel the cost is worth it. I'm an early adopter to a new kind of machine - I expect to pay more.
see colon
13-May-2005, 19:30
I'm an early adopter to a new kind of machine
but it's not a new kind of machine. ngage and zodiac both did what PSP does (movies, music, pictures, and games) and they've been available for years. sony may have "got it right" but they weren't the pioneers you are making them out to be.
mckmas8808
13-May-2005, 21:33
Yeah but there are the first to get it right. Therefore they will be the ones that most remember 5 to 10 years from now.
I'm an early adopter to a new kind of machine
but it's not a new kind of machine. ngage and zodiac both did what PSP does (movies, music, pictures, and games) and they've been available for years. sony may have "got it right" but they weren't the pioneers you are making them out to be.
OK, but it doesn't matter that you got there first if no one remembers your name. And Ngage and Zodiac are non-events because they barely made a blip on most consumers' radar.
That's one of the advantages of being a Sony - you have the financial resources, marketing acumen, and name recognition to, if not pioneer a market, then succeed where others have failed.
In this case, they're building on their PlayStation franchise, and one has to wonder if maybe this wasn't the plan all along... the very REASON Sony got into games in the first place... because it will serve as a stepping stone to something even bigger.
Whatever, I'm babbling. Bottom line, it's less important to get there first than to be first to get it right.
PSP is very low cost for what it does.
is it?
That's what I said, isn't it?
It is amazingly cheap for the level of power and the awesome LCD screen it has.
Yeah but there are the first to get it right. Therefore they will be the ones that most remember 5 to 10 years from now.
says who ? Its a handheld with bad battery life that isn't getting it right . Its damn close but night right
PSP does not have "bad" battery life.
My ipod has a similar if not worse battery life than the PSP (especially if I'm skipping through tracks) and it's doing a LOT less than the PSP is, AND it hasn't stopped Apple storming the world with them. For most people, 5-6 hours is a perfectly acceptable battery life.
pahcman
14-May-2005, 11:54
actually if one just try teh zodiac, can easy say sony did not "get rights fully"
for one the analog stick, yes u can press as button too, roll aaaaaaaaaaaall over psp nub. this is no exggeration, try it and get back to us.
the zodiac is also lighter smaller compacter slimmer than psp.
the built quality is superb for that, feel strong when u grip it tight, and buttons click fast and hard. the shoulder buttons are smartly sized great to use.
everything imho a handheld gadget should feel. psp feel bulky and weak in quality, just grip psp tight after u grip zodiac. u will fear psp breaking up.
the screen is higher res but no fancy widescreen. thats one way sony got positively right. by being first to use hiquality lcd panel planned for future pmps. psp lcd, while not best ever portable screen, still really good, rich colors, just the right size between big enough yet cutie small. but i sure other companys will start to use those sharp/samsung pmp panels too.
i say zodiac feel more like the real tech cool gadget wheres psp is more a tech cool gameboy toy.
but psp do have some designs area better, mostly as a games player. duh.. zodiac is too slim for own good, to hold too long action gaming and face buttons bad ergonimics.
in past when saw psp photos and heard kutargai want to shrink it further, i thought kidding me! but went finally in my hands, im sure there are few areas more to slim and toughen up.
mech:
It is amazingly cheap for the level of power
It's sold under a loss leading business model which most consumer electronics aren't, so it may be a comparatively low priced product. For it's capability, its technology carries high costs, though: four pipelines, 166-MHz clockrate, only a few hours of battery life, etc.
For it's capability, its technology carries high costs, though: four pipelines, 166-MHz clockrate, only a few hours of battery life, etc.
:?:
Four pipelines and 166Mhz clockrate - what?
But yes, I also believe PSP is being sold at a loss just like PS2, etc - which goes against the Nintendo model, which always made the handheld profit off the console itself.
PSP games are awesomely cheap actually - I'm paying LESS for PSP games than I was for my original Gameboy games! :) Less than my GBA games too! It's amazing.
As for the whole battery life thing, read my post above ;)
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 03:35
I wouldn't say $40 and $50 for portable games as being cheap.
see colon
15-May-2005, 03:46
PSP is very low cost for what it does.
is it?
That's what I said, isn't it?
It is amazingly cheap for the level of power and the awesome LCD screen it has.
what you said was that the PSP is low cost for what it does. the PSP plays games, displays pictures, plays movies, and plays music. the ngage does all of that and is $150 cheaper. other devices can do what the PSP does (like portable mp3, DVD, pda's, high end phones) and many cost less than the PSP.
saying that the PSP is cheap for the quality of what it does is another story. it's not what the PSP does it's how well it does it.
PSP games are awesomely cheap actually - I'm paying LESS for PSP games than I was for my original Gameboy games! Less than my GBA games too! It's amazing.
where i live there is about a $20US difference between PSP and GBA games, and at least a $10 difference with DS games. you are either getting a great deal on PSP games, or someone has been ripping you off for years.
I payed more for my portable mp3 player that most definately carries less features than the PSP does...
anyway, you guys sure like to bitch around the same old issues over and over again. I think some of you are forgetting the times when the first GameBoy came out and how its battery faired. Then, you have the same old issues with the newer class mobile phones that pack in more and more features and better displays at the expense of battery life... As anywhere, technology comes at a cost, either in size, battery life or other factors. It's getting the balance right and in that aspect, I'd favour a PSP type unit over a Nintendo DS class any day, any time. 4 to 6 hours is very acceptable and seeing how it's selling, I figure I'm not in the minority.
saying that the PSP is cheap for the quality of what it does is another story. it's not what the PSP does it's how well it does it.
See, you've completely misconstrued what I wrote, and are having a roundabout silly argument for the hell of it. Obviously when I wrote "what it does" I meant how well it does stuff.
where i live there is about a $20US difference between PSP and GBA games, and at least a $10 difference with DS games. you are either getting a great deal on PSP games, or someone has been ripping you off for years.
Welcome to the wonderful world of PAL territories. Gameboy games here cost between AU$60-80 - I paid AU$55 for Wipeout Pure DELIVERED from Canada.
AU$55 is really cheap for such great games.
$80 for a GBA game is outrageous.
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 04:47
I payed more for my portable mp3 player that most definately carries less features than the PSP does...
anyway, you guys sure like to bitch around the same old issues over and over again. I think some of you are forgetting the times when the first GameBoy came out and how its battery faired. Then, you have the same old issues with the newer class mobile phones that pack in more and more features and better displays at the expense of battery life... As anywhere, technology comes at a cost, either in size, battery life or other factors. It's getting the balance right and in that aspect, I'd favour a PSP type unit over a Nintendo DS class any day, any time. 4 to 6 hours is very acceptable and seeing how it's selling, I figure I'm not in the minority.
I paid $175 for my 1GB flash MP3 player. I wouldn't want to spend that much just for a 1GB MS DUO itself. Not to mention my flash MP3 player is leagues above what PSP offers in terms of size, function, features.
As for the original GB, I believe it lasted 20+ hours on 4 alkalines.
20+ hours on 4 AAs? :lol: In your dreams maybe!
It lasted about 8-10 hours... and if you used rechargeable batteries, it was more like 3. Less than the PSP, omg! Yet somehow I coped! :)
Comparing the price of dedicated MP3 players to the PSP is ridiculous, the MP3 playback on the PSP is just a bonus. $175 is a bit rich for a 1gig duo stick btw.
see colon
15-May-2005, 05:11
See, you've completely misconstrued what I wrote, and are having a roundabout silly argument for the hell of it. Obviously when I wrote "what it does" I meant how well it does stuff.
not to bicker, but when i wrote "is it?" i meant "is the PSP cheap for the things that it does". how well it does those things is another story. perhaps you misconstrued what i wrote. regardless, i'm tired of running in circles because we can't seam to communicate with eachother. no hard feelings i hope.
As for the original GB, I believe it lasted 20+ hours on 4 alkalines
i remember it being closer to 8-10 hours or so. IIRC it had a little over twice the life of a gamegear, and they lasted about 3-4 hours and that was with 6 AA's. with the light on of course, and you really couldn't see anything without it on.
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 05:15
20+ hours on 4 AAs? :lol: In your dreams maybe!
It lasted about 8-10 hours... and if you used rechargeable batteries, it was more like 3. Less than the PSP, omg! Yet somehow I coped! :)
Comparing the price of dedicated MP3 players to the PSP is ridiculous, the MP3 playback on the PSP is just a bonus. $175 is a bit rich for a 1gig duo stick btw.
I'm not sure if I got that right or not but the orginal GB lasted a long time with alkalines. It wasn't designed back then to get lots of time with NiCads anyway, since NiCads has way lower capacity than today. Alkalines OTOH have about the same capacity as Alkalines 10 years ago. :wink:
My MP3 player has built-in FM, line in recording, voice recorder, not to mention awesome sound. I was just giving my 2 cents about PSP being a lot for your money which in reality it isn't since music and movie playback don't work out of the box.
Funny, because music and video playback worked out of the box just fine for me.
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 05:41
Funny, because music and video playback worked out of the box just fine for me.
How many MP3s at 320kbps can your 32MB MS DUO hold?
How many hours of MPEG4 can that MS DUO hold?
I rest my case. :lol:
Funny, because music and video playback worked out of the box just fine for me.
How many MP3s at 320kbps can your 32MB MS DUO hold?
How many hours of MPEG4 can that MS DUO hold?
I rest my case. :lol:
Why are you bringing up 320kbps MP3s?
You rest what case? That because the 32mb duo that comes with the PSP doesn't hold that much data, "video and mp3" don't work out of the box?
Hey guess what PCE, none of my digital cameras have come with more than a 16mb flash card, I have to buy a bigger one myself - but it still takes photos "out of the box"!
Oh and hey, the DS doesn't come with any games - I guess it doesn't play games "out of the box". :lol:
You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 06:37
Funny, because music and video playback worked out of the box just fine for me.
How many MP3s at 320kbps can your 32MB MS DUO hold?
How many hours of MPEG4 can that MS DUO hold?
I rest my case. :lol:
Why are you bringing up 320kbps MP3s?
You rest what case? That because the 32mb duo that comes with the PSP doesn't hold that much data, "video and mp3" don't work out of the box?
Hey guess what PCE, none of my digital cameras have come with more than a 16mb flash card, I have to buy a bigger one myself - but it still takes photos "out of the box"!
Oh and hey, the DS doesn't come with any games - I guess it doesn't play games "out of the box". :lol:
You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.
Why 320kbps MP3s? Because that's the bitrate I use. I bet you use 8kbps just so you can argue that PSP with it's 32MB MS DUO can hold hundreds of songs. :lol:
Same with movies.
It's obvious you know what I meant but are scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to dodge the questions because you're fully aware that out of the box PSP can't do either of those two things to any useable degree. If it's useless then it's effectively non existent. :wink:
Keep trying to convince the rest of us though, I'm enjoying the comedy. :wink:
Why 320kbps MP3s? Because that's the bitrate I use. I bet you use 8kbps just so you can argue that PSP with it's 32MB MS DUO can hold hundreds of songs.
:roll:
You're trying to tell me video and MP3 playback doesn't work out of the box.
It does.
You then start bringing up 320kbps MP3s and how many you can fit on a 32mb memory stick duo.
It's fanboyism at its finest. What exactly are you trying to prove? "Oh noes, you need to buy some more storage to put MP3s and videos on" - so what? Doesn't mean video and mp3 playback don't work "out of the box". Many gadgets - PDAs, digital cameras, video cameras, etc - come with limited or no storage with them, the user has to buy their own. Would you argue their functionality is also broken "out of the box"?
What questions am I trying to dodge exactly? Rhetorical ones about how few MP3s and videos can fit on a 32mb memory stick?
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 06:57
Why 320kbps MP3s? Because that's the bitrate I use. I bet you use 8kbps just so you can argue that PSP with it's 32MB MS DUO can hold hundreds of songs.
:roll:
You're trying to tell me video and MP3 playback doesn't work out of the box.
It does.
You then start bringing up 320kbps MP3s and how many you can fit on a 32mb memory stick duo.
It's fanboyism at its finest. What exactly are you trying to prove? "Oh noes, you need to buy some more storage to put MP3s and videos on" - so what? Doesn't mean video and mp3 playback don't work "out of the box". Many gadgets - PDAs, digital cameras, video cameras, etc - come with limited or no storage with them, the user has to buy their own. Would you argue their functionality is also broken "out of the box"?
What questions am I trying to dodge exactly? Rhetorical ones about how few MP3s and videos can fit on a 32mb memory stick?
You're retreating/resorting to a semantics debate...keep dodging the real issue ie usability out of the box.
Now who's dodging questions?
Many gadgets - PDAs, digital cameras, video cameras, etc - come with limited or no storage with them, the user has to buy their own. Would you argue their functionality is also broken "out of the box"?
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 07:01
Now who's dodging questions?
Many gadgets - PDAs, digital cameras, video cameras, etc - come with limited or no storage with them, the user has to buy their own. Would you argue their functionality is also broken "out of the box"?
MP3 players don't require you to buy flash cards. :lol:
Oh (http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/portable-media/flash/evergreen-dnmp3sd-cheap-sd-player-100664.php) really? (http://www.hifix.co.uk/sitemap/panasonic/panasonic-sv-sd51.html)
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 07:26
Oh really? (http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/portable-media/flash/evergreen-dnmp3sd-cheap-sd-player-100664.php)
So you scramble to find exception to the rule to argue your iffy points. There's a phrase for that, it's called grasping at straws or scraping the bottom of the barrel . :wink: :lol:
Fact is 99.9% of flash MP3 players have the flash RAM built-in, no ifs or buts about this.
Scramble? Because I pointed out that there are MP3 players that take external storage? Exception to the rule? Man, there are HEAPS of MP3 players that take SD Cards or various other flash memory types, and there always have been. Those were just two. People LIKE being able to upgrade their storage.
You still haven't answered my question. So are these MP3 players broken too?
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 07:39
Read above. You're really desparate in hanging on to your sematics argument it seems. I guess you can't admit PSP with 32MB MSDUO isn't so great compared to 1GB flash MP3 players. :lol:
BTW the percentage of flash MP3 players that take external flash cards is like 0.1%. :lol: It's pretty clear why you're grasping at every last straw available to futily argue your iffy point.
PSP tanked as a MP3 player out of the box any way you want to spin it. Heck you can't even argue about sound quality since a 32MB MSDUO would need to hold 4kbps bitrate MP3s. :lol:
Read above. You're really desparate in hanging on to your sematics argument it seems. I guess you can't admit PSP with 32MB MSDUO isn't so great compared to 1GB flash MP3 players.
Desperate in hanging on to my semantics debate? I don't think so. You've failed to adequately explain how you can say "music and movie playback don't work out of the box" when they both obviously do. Trying to back this up with "usability" arguments about the fact that you have to buy extra storage is riduculous - as I pointed out, most devices requiring extra storage require the user to buy a decent amount themself, and only come with token amounts. Again - would you say a digital camera "doesn't take photos out of the box" because it comes with an 8mb compact flash card?
And why are you suddenly bringing bizarre arguments like "I guess you can't admit PSP with 32MB MSDUO isn't so great compared to 1GB flash MP3 players"? If you want something that plays MP3s, a 1GB flash player is obviously a much better solution than a PSP with a 32mb card. If you just want something that plays MP3s, a flash memory based player is obviously going to be better. What's your point?
PSP tanked as a MP3 player out of the box any way you want to spin it. Heck you can't even argue about sound quality since a 32MB MSDUO would need to hold 4kbps bitrate MP3s.
You're talking as if the only memory storage it can hold is the 32Mb card.
I, like many other PSP users, bought it with a sizeable memory card, and can store hours of videos and MP3s on it. It has great sound quality (better than my iPod in fact) and it works just fine out of the box (with less faffing around than with an iPod no less). So how exactly has it "tanked"?
My PSP hasn't replaced my iPod, nor will it ever. But this isn't an argument about whether the PSP is better than a dedicated MP3 player, so I'm not sure why you turned it into one.
mech:
Four pipelines and 166Mhz clockrate - what?
The PSP's costs are high for its level of performance. Four pipelines probably means the graphics chip's price (size) is high and power consumption is high.
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 08:45
The point is my $175 1GB flash MP3 player can play MP3s out of the box. A $250 PSP cannot play 1GB worth of music out of the box. It can only play 32MB worth of music out of the box which is WORTHLESS. Nobody in this day and age buys 32MB flash MP3 players, NOBODY. Therefore your PSP is useless as an MP3 player out of the box until you buy a flash card. To equal the useability of my 1GB flash MP3 player you'd have to spend a buttload of money on a 1GB MSDUO that's not even factoring in the other conveniences of a flash MP3 player like mass storage device, FM reception, recording, portability, etc. In the end if you want to compare PSP to a 1GB MP3 player you have to add the cost of the 1GB MSDUO into the equation. Same with the movie playback feature. This is in response to that comment about getting more for your money when buying a PSP, which in reality you're not getting more for your money because you have to spend even more money to get those features to work as a comparable standalone music or movie device. Heck I can even buy a $100 portable DVD player with a 7" widescreen today that can playback any of the thousands of DVD titles on the market.
:roll:
You know, PCE, I doubt Sony means for PSP to outdo dedicated MP3 players, DVD players, photo viewers, etc.
PSP is meant to appeal to everyone who might like to watch movies, listen to music, view photos, and play games - all in one unit. It does this, and that makes it both unique and desirable. Why does this seem to scare you so?
And please - about the 32MB cards. We've had to buy extra memory cards for every game system save Xbox, so this is hardly a dealbreaker. In any case, I'm sure future generations of PSP will include a sizable hard drive, which will put this argument to rest and make Sony's detractors sweat a little more. :wink:
PC-Engine
15-May-2005, 15:48
:roll:
You know, PCE, I doubt Sony means for PSP to outdo dedicated MP3 players, DVD players, photo viewers, etc.
PSP is meant to appeal to everyone who might like to watch movies, listen to music, view photos, and play games - all in one unit. It does this, and that makes it both unique and desirable. Why does this seem to scare you so?
And please - about the 32MB cards. We've had to buy extra memory cards for every game system save Xbox, so this is hardly a dealbreaker. In any case, I'm sure future generations of PSP will include a sizable hard drive, which will put this argument to rest and make Sony's detractors sweat a little more. :wink:
Uh my response was to reiterate what see colon said which was:
what you said was that the PSP is low cost for what it does. the PSP plays games, displays pictures, plays movies, and plays music. the ngage does all of that and is $150 cheaper. other devices can do what the PSP does (like portable mp3, DVD, pda's, high end phones) and many cost less than the PSP.
saying that the PSP is cheap for the quality of what it does is another story. it's not what the PSP does it's how well it does it.
Now really why would I be scared especially when PSP already has its own set of problems like declining sales, dead pixels problems, stuck button, poor battery, and sub DC level graphics? I think Teasy said it best...
It's a beautiful model, and scary powerful. If I were Nintendo right now, I'd be stocking up on clean underwear, 'cuz the next few years are gonna be messy.
I've really heard everything now. Obviously being well in the lead doesn't panic Nintendo as much as it does you..
BTW I have to say the way you talk about PSP I think you may be the one who needs to stock up on clean underwear mate :)
:lol:
You might be scared because despite all of PSP's "failings," it marks Sony's entry into a market that is Nintendo's last stronghold. And deep down, you know it's got potential to be very successful.
You are right when you say that PSP has its problems, but if I had ever once seen you acknowledge that the machine also has its merits, I would be less apt to dismiss your criticisms as simply those of an anti-Sony zealot. No offense. :)
it marks Sony's entry into a market that is Nintendo's last stronghold.
Pokemon licensing?
Mobile gaming has always been a heavily crowded, secondary, almost disposable games market.... there's far more than just Game Boy out there. PSP's novel in that it's taking a high end approach, with a loss taking platform and console sized game budgets. I hope it works out for Sony, but honestly PSP looks to be a risky venture at best right now. Hopefully they hang on long enough for costs to normalize and make the platform a desirable enterprise for all involved. Right now it's moving software at Game Boy levels and being outsold worldwide 2 to 1 by Nintendo's antiquated dual screened cockblock. I really see little reason for any developer to consider PSP R&D over PS2, there's almost no benefit.
Good points, jarrod, but I just think all Sony needs is time.
They're in it for the long haul with this device, with the intent of reaching beyond just the portable games market. Sooner or later, PSP's price point will fall to a point where Sony can compete more directly in the middle to low end of this market, as well as others.
Perhaps this first effort will turn out to be a stepping stone, a way for Sony to get its foot in the door as Microsoft has with Xbox. But ultimately, I think it's a good idea that's destined to take off.
see colon
16-May-2005, 00:26
Perhaps this first effort will turn out to be a stepping stone, a way for Sony to get its foot in the door as Microsoft has with Xbox. But ultimately, I think it's a good idea that's destined to take off.
the question is will the idea take off for sony. thus far nintendo has proven time and again that it can sell handhelds that are underpowered compared to the competition by reputaion (and proper advertising) alone. sony's entry to the handheld space might drive nintendo to release a high powered gameboy, elcipsing the psp graphicly and with a backlog of games big enough to keep gamers happy for years.
the question is will the idea take off for sony. thus far nintendo has proven time and again that it can sell handhelds that are underpowered compared to the competition by reputaion (and proper advertising) alone. sony's entry to the handheld space might drive nintendo to release a high powered gameboy, elcipsing the psp graphicly and with a backlog of games big enough to keep gamers happy for years.
You mean this high-powered Gameboy would still use carts? Unlikely. Unless Nintendo includes a cart slot in addition to a disc tray, which would add to the cost of this much more expensive (compared to previous Gameboys) hardware.
Would this new Gameboy be a "pure" games machine? If so, PSP will still appeal to those who want to do more than just play games. If not, Nintendo better launch it under a different name, because the brand names "Nintendo" and "Gameboy" aren't going to fly very well with people outside the company's core audience.
Then too, the price can't be too high, 'cause Nintendo's target audience isn't going to be able to pay much more than $199 for a handheld.
Don't worry, Sony's committed to PSP. I think this system may be part of the reason Sony got into the videogame business in the first place... to not just take a bite of the games market, but to take a big share of a new "lifestyle" market - built around personal entertainment devices and encompassing all variety of media.
For that, they're positioned better than any company out there.
see colon
16-May-2005, 08:34
Would this new Gameboy be a "pure" games machine?
nintendo has a long history of selling non-gaming add-ons to it's gameboys. music players, video players, cameras, printers, ect have all been released officialy from nintendo and 3rd party devices have included tv tuners, videoconfrencing, and instant messaging devices. even if the core device is a "pure" gaming machine it won't be limited to being one with the proper accessories.
Good points, jarrod, but I just think all Sony needs is time.
They're in it for the long haul with this device, with the intent of reaching beyond just the portable games market. Sooner or later, PSP's price point will fall to a point where Sony can compete more directly in the middle to low end of this market, as well as others.
Perhaps this first effort will turn out to be a stepping stone, a way for Sony to get its foot in the door as Microsoft has with Xbox. But ultimately, I think it's a good idea that's destined to take off.
I agree, SCEI's clearly taking a "step down" approach here... the question though is if the company is really heathly enough to try and force a console model on an overwhelmingly low end marketplace. With Sony's board turnover (resulting directly in Kutaragi losing influence) combined with the utter failure of T-60 and gigantic impending investment/losses for PS3/Cell... I'm just not sure the timing's right for PSP. Sony's in a tough spot right now, they really need PSP to take off... they can't afford an "Xbox" of their own really.
You mean this high-powered Gameboy would still use carts? Unlikely. Unless Nintendo includes a cart slot in addition to a disc tray, which would add to the cost of this much more expensive (compared to previous Gameboys) hardware.
I don't see why not really, plenty of PS2 games shipped on CD-roms and 3DM media is already in mass production at 256MB. I don't doubt the next Game Boy will use a solid state solution, there's just too many inherent advantages over optical when it comes to handhelds (drive cost, formfactor, durability, etc).
Would this new Gameboy be a "pure" games machine? If so, PSP will still appeal to those who want to do more than just play games.
I think Play-yan is a good indication of where Nintendo's headed. I could definitely see a SD slot in the next Game Boy used for MPEG/JPEG/MP3 support.
If not, Nintendo better launch it under a different name, because the brand names "Nintendo" and "Gameboy" aren't going to fly very well with people outside the company's core audience.
Thing is the "Game Boy audience" is nearly as large as the "PlayStation audience". You say "Nintendo core audience" as if that's all Nintendo's likely to attract. I'd say it's more likely PSP's reaching to the "Sony core audience" for the foreseeable future than anything.
Then too, the price can't be too high, 'cause Nintendo's target audience isn't going to be able to pay much more than $199 for a handheld.
I agree here, which is why Nintendo's waiting. They don't want to charge $299 for a PSP spec machine right now, they'd prefer to wait a few years and charge $99 in 2007. Obviously there's the disadvantage of giving PSP a huge lead time this way though, hence their DS stall tactic.
PC-Engine
16-May-2005, 17:13
I don't see why not really, plenty of PS2 games shipped on CD-roms and 3DM media is already in mass production at 256MB. I don't doubt the next Game Boy will use a solid state solution, there's just too many inherent advantages over optical when it comes to handhelds (drive cost, formfactor, durability, etc).
Kolgar doesn't know that PSP games are only using a couple hundred MBs at best even though they're on 1.8GB UMDs. :lol:
see colon
16-May-2005, 17:29
Kolgar doesn't know that PSP games are only using a couple hundred MBs at best even though they're on 1.8GB UMDs.
beynd the fact that a few hundred MB is generaly enough for most portable games, craming your optical media with data only leads to more disc access, which leads to less batery life. i think this might be the reason why PSP games usualy have lower texture detail than comparable ps2 games, dispite the similar memory configurations on both machines.
PCEngine - sorry, but after enjoying CD-quality speech, music, and video in my games since the PSX days in 1995, I'm just not going back to cartridges - EVER. 8)
see colon
16-May-2005, 18:37
PCEngine - sorry, but after enjoying CD-quality speech, music, and video in my games since the PSX days in 1995, I'm just not going back to cartridges - EVER
did you ever play resident evil 2 on the n64? it had all of the speech and video from a 2 disk psx game on one cart with 0 loading time.
there were several n64 games with cd quality sound, music, and FMV and they were all cart based.
Never played it, but I remember being impressed that Capcom managed to stuff all that content onto an N64 cart.
Still, carts were more expensive back then... I remember paying $70 or $80 USD for a few of the big Super NES and N64 carts.
And the industry had moved on. Had N gone with an optical media with N64, it just may have crushed Sony's PlayStation that gen. Things might look very different today.
So I think it'll be an interesting choice if N stays with carts for its GB successor. Personally, I'm not sure how I'd feel about going back to carts. I've become accustomed to loading times, and I like that space restrictions are no longer a big concern. Devs may not need more than a few hundred megabytes for most games, but there's always a GT4 or something that comes along and makes you glad for the extra space.
see colon
16-May-2005, 19:13
personaly i'm less excited about having a relativly unlimted space for read only data than i am for the psp's virtualy unlimited potential for writable data. imagine a portable timesplitters, complete with level editor, and the ability to share relativly huge maps with friends. or an RPG maker where you could easily trade the games you made with others. or a sports game where you could record your whole season and edit it down to a sweet demo real to share with friends
PCEngine - sorry, but after enjoying CD-quality speech, music, and video in my games since the PSX days in 1995, I'm just not going back to cartridges - EVER
did you ever play resident evil 2 on the n64? it had all of the speech and video from a 2 disk psx game on one cart with 0 loading time.
there were several n64 games with cd quality sound, music, and FMV and they were all cart based.
Not true, it had load times caused by decompressing all the data. Plus it had compression artifacts. However, I've been quite impressed by DS's sound quality compared to n64, and starfox 64 was even a fully voiced game, so it's not like cds are needed for sound beyond beeps and bops.
see colon
18-May-2005, 02:38
Not true, it had load times caused by decompressing all the data.
huh? i saw no load times (at least none more than a second or two) in the whole game.
Not true, it had load times caused by decompressing all the data.
huh? i saw no load times (at least none more than a second or two) in the whole game.
I remember the fades to a black screen taking a good couple seconds, just long enough for it to register that it was loading and not just cutting to black.
20+ hours on 4 AAs? :lol: In your dreams maybe!
It lasted about 8-10 hours... and if you used rechargeable batteries, it was more like 3. Less than the PSP, omg! Yet somehow I coped! :)
Comparing the price of dedicated MP3 players to the PSP is ridiculous, the MP3 playback on the PSP is just a bonus. $175 is a bit rich for a 1gig duo stick btw.
Last time I did the benchmark my old gameboy lasted 31 hours in 4 2400mah rechargeable AA's.
Was this back in 1989 was it?
So what good is that? We're talking about the batteries at the time.
So what good is that? We're talking about the batteries at the time.
Well, not sure about in 1989, but in the mid 90s with the revised play it loud series(not pocket) I got well over 10 hours on 4 AAs. Not sure if the play it loud series had any differences besides cosmetic though, and I'm not sure how much battery technology improved from 1989 to mid 90s.(though I was using just regular old alkaline batteries, surely they had those in 1989?)
Well, not sure about in 1989, but in the mid 90s with the revised play it loud series(not pocket) I got well over 10 hours on 4 AAs. Not sure if the play it loud series had any differences besides cosmetic though, and I'm not sure how much battery technology improved from 1989 to mid 90s.(though I was using just regular old alkaline batteries, surely they had those in 1989?)
It lasted about 8-10 hours... and if you used rechargeable batteries, it was more like 3.
Already said alkaline lasted from 8 to 10 hours :) Rechargable technology has changed and improved quite a lot in the last 16 years...
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.