3 m PSP's already sold worldwide according to sony

[jvd]

jvd, PSP's not competing directly with DS today. Sony's marketing it to a broader audience (though primarily older gamers vs. Ninty's younger ones) at a higher price point.

Yes, they have their eyes on Nintendo's market share, but as with PSX, they're going for that older buyer first. The price will drop, more games will come out that appeal to a wider range of gamers, and PSP will begin making big inroads into Nintendo-land.

You just see if I'm right.

No sony has no choice but to go for the high end market . A 5 year old would destroy the psp in seconds . I had a 30 year old man return one because the side cracked. We had a 18 year old return one because the thumb nob was jamed down . Its not solid and it wont take a fall or two. One fall with it landing on its face and its done . So it will never sell to a 5 year old untill its under 100$ .

But the ds can sell to both markets and as a 20 something male i bought the ds and only got the psp for free. So if i'm that older market your talking about sony is def fighting against nintendo here.

As for price drops and inroads well I doubt that will happen .

Next xmass psp can drop to what 200 here ? OKay the ds hits 100$ . The psp drops to 150$ the ds can hit under 75$ and I doubt that sony can drop the psp to 150$ usd for at least another 2 years .

By then nintendo can put out the gameboy 2 with gamecube + graphics and squeeze the hell out of the psp . They can have the high selling ds low in price and then the sleek new graphicly impressive gb2 . Price the gb2 close enough to the psp with out lossing money , flood it with ports and original games and the psp is in a horrible place to be .

 

[Kolgar]

You know, people tried telling me the same thing when PSX came out. "Nintendo's going to crush Sony."

People told me again with Dreamcast, when Xbox and Gamecube launched. "PS2 is going to get buried - especially when people see how great Xbox and GC games look!"

Only once have I stooped to telling someone "I told you so." Check back in a year or two and see how generous I'm feeling then.

 

[Ty]

But the ds never had to flaunt its graphics to sell nor did its fan base have to claim its graphics were on par with current gen consoles . That selling point for the psp is gone in a few months

The PSP does look nearly as good as current generation home consoles - we agree on this. But even if Xenon looks 100x better, it's not really going to change the quality of games on the PSP. The selling point would simply be, 'The most powerful handheld'.

One could easily turn your style of argument back onto the DS, "the PSP never had to flaunt silly gimmicks". But that wouldn't be fair either.

However judging from the psp titles in the pipeline and out the huge majority of titles are ports .

It's a good thing then, that the PS2 has such a huge library that there are bound to be some good handheld versions then.

From the ds it doesn't seem that way , it seems like there is a good mix .

It doesn't seem to me that the DS has many games coming out period. Or not as much I'd like anyhow.

A good game is a good game no matter when you play it .

Now you are contradicting yourself. If you believe this, then a good game that is a recent title is still a good game.

Mario 64 was great then and great now . The tripple a games ported to the psp will be great too , it doesn't change . The diffrence is on the ds the tripple a games are fresher because they didn't recently apear on the home console .

I have a console musuem at work; Vectrex, Intellivision, Jaguar, 3DO, Saturn, Dreamcast, N64, Colecovision, etc. etc. (In fact tonight I just played Star Control 2 on the 3DO - the best version of one of the best games) so I'm pretty aware of old games. I just think it's funny for you to argue that older is better and that "fresher" is worse. If that is the case then the further back you go, the better. Why buy a DS which is relatively fresh compared to the original gameboy?

Besides, as I said, both Sony and Nintendo have to push unique and exclusive titles to their respective platforms. Let's put it this way; If the DS didn't have any innovative games using the new features (touch screen, stylus, dual screen, etc.) then all you'd have is a portable N64.

Would that be better than a portable PS2? Of course not. But your argument nonsensically states that yes, the portable DS would be better because of it's older library. In other words, what is going to make the DS better is NOT because it's got older games but rather because of unique and creative games not available elsewhere.

My case in point is God of war . Lots of people liked it , i found it enjoyable . But how many people would rush out and buy a port of it on the psp for christmass ?

I don't know. It depends on what they tried to accomplish. If all the portable version was, was a straight port that didn't add anything, then I sure would hope that it wouldn't sell because I don't want publishers getting lazy.

Not to mention that if you want to play a port from nintendo 64 you have to break out your nintendo 64 . IF you want to play a port of a psone or ps2 game you have your ps2 already hooked up. IF you want to play a ps2 port next christmass you have your ps3 to play it on . That will hurt the apeal

If all the DS had was N64 ports, then surely the DS would lose a lot of its appeal.

IT depends , price , battery life , games .

If it launched at 200$ usd . Had a good library and gave me 8 hours wifi and had original games along with a good balance of gamecube games i would pick it up most likely

Why would you? You've been arguing about how recent titles lessen the appeal for a portable?

After all (till i was mugged) I owned two psps .

Sorry to hear that. Did you pay a thing for them or were they gifts of a sort?

I agree adn whats in the psp's pipeline isn't going to spur many sales they are almost all ports . However for nintendo you have some orignal games (look at nintendo dogs ) there are many more original games coming to it than the psp .

On the other hand since they are ports the psp is getting flooded with games .

I must not know enough of what is out there.

I don't think sony is going to outsell the ds and i never thought it would .

Me neither.

Sony fans like to point out its a third pillar and nintendo will soon abandon it .

"Sony fans"? You're always saying this forum is filled with Sony fans, give me the name of 5 of them who has claimed this.

But its hard to abandon a system that is inderectly the upgrade path for any gba owner . The games are fun and the system brings in a new inovative feature .

Actually it's very easy to abandon an indirect upgrade path. But Nintendo isn't going to abandon it.

Sure watching media on your psp is a neat idea but for the average user they aren't going to a) buy the storage space and b) take the time to convert the video

Agreed. This has to be easier for consumers.

I think the psp will give nintendo the most competition its had since the game gear . But in the end it wont be enough to unseat it . Basicly you have a reversal of the home console front .

Nintendo have been kings in this field for several generations without any real competition so absolutely Nintendo is the undisputed champion. Did I ever state otherwise?

 

[PC-Engine]

Kolgar, question for you. What happens when SONY decides that a touchscreen is essential for the future of their PSP handheld line and incorporates one? Will you still shun it?

As for a GCP, a hypothetical straight GCP is a more attractive idea than the PSP because if you own a GCN you'd only need to buy one game and be able to play it on both machines. With PSP if you own a PS2 you'd still have to buy the same PS2 game in UMD format and for about the same price to boot. If you want to take the GCP idea even further, what about a single touch screen GCP with gyroscopic control? That would be even more attractive. With this you'd have the same benefit mentioned above and at the same time also have the benefit of offering something new.

 

[jvd]

But even if Xenon looks 100x better, it's not really going to change the quality of games on the PSP. The selling point would simply be, 'The most powerful handheld'.

The ports would have to be high quality and they aren't . The launch line up and whats out now is just okay . When you get mgs2 and the other triple aaa titles then you have something to go on .

One could easily turn your style of argument back onto the DS, "the PSP never had to flaunt silly gimmicks". But that wouldn't be fair either.

Mp3 playback , video playback , movie umd play back ... these are all gimmicks . At least the touch screen has added to games in a unqiue way and in doing so moved the main reason to have a hand held portable system foward . That being to play games .

It's a good thing then, that the PS2 has such a huge library that there are bound to be some good handheld versions then.

But how many people will be willing to pay for all these games when they will be playable on the ps2 / 3 at little to no cost (already owned or cheaply sold as the ps3 is out )

Not to mention that any game on the psp can be put on the ds with only image quality change . Yet a ds game wont allways be put on a psp as there is no touch screen.

It doesn't seem to me that the DS has many games coming out period. Or not as much I'd like anyhow

Quallity vs quanity . I rather have 10 really good games worth playing than 50 games i would never touch. Right now that is whats happening . There are more psp games but the quality lvl (Aside from graphics ) are lower than that of the ds . Aside from that in the comming months you get some huge titles that stress all the features of the ds . Nintendodogs (mic +touch) , metriod (touch screen + wifi ) golden eye (touch screen + wifi ) animal cross (all the features )

So there will be good games and there will be a steady flow .

Now you are contradicting yourself. If you believe this, then a good game that is a recent title is still a good game.

Not at all. The game will stil lbe good but if you've just beaten it , your not going to rush out to beat it again .

Would you read a book and then a few weeks later buy the book again in paper back and read it again ? Even a few months later and I know you still wouldn't . You would say hey i own it already and i can still play it whenever i want (ps3) might as well spend my money on a new game.... oh wait these are 90% ports so there aren't many new games to choose from .

I'm pretty aware of old games. I just think it's funny for you to argue that older is better and that "fresher" is worse. If that is the case then the further back you go, the better. Why buy a DS which is relatively fresh compared to the original gameboy?

You can't get a new ds . Aside from that your making crap up now . new isn't worse than old . Except when talking about tripple a titles the port from the ps2 will be newer and freshly played vs the port for the n64 which most likely hasn't been played in longer.

Once again the what are you more likely to read . The book you read last year or the book you haven't read in 9 years ?

The book you read 3 months ago or the book you read 6 years ago ?

That is the diffrence i'm talking about . Not many people are going to rush out and buy god of war on the psp if it comes out in 5 months because most will have it on the ps2.

Let's put it this way; If the DS didn't have any innovative games using the new features (touch screen, stylus, dual screen, etc.) then all you'd have is a portable N64.

what does this have to do with anything . The fact is that nintendo does have the touch screen + dual screen and sony doesn't have those inovations .

This can only help to put a new spin on those old games. The psp will have to stay with the ports .

Would that be better than a portable PS2? Of course not. But your argument nonsensically states that yes, the portable DS would be better because of it's older library

The system wouldn't be better , but the library would . Not because the games are better quality but because haven't been enjoyed in a long period of time and thus the experiance would be fresher than playing a game that you just beat a few months ago .

That is why the gameboy ports from the nes did well. Sure it would have been nice to have n64 portable games 3 years after the n64 came out (or 4 or 5) but how many people would rush out and rebuy mario 64 so quickly ? Or loz ? But many would go out and buy mario bros , mario bros 2 , mario bros 3 , the original loz , links adventures . Thats simply because they have not been played in a long time , are on systems that may not work , aren't owned anymore or simply packed away .

I don't know. It depends on what they tried to accomplish. If all the portable version was, was a straight port that didn't add anything, then I sure would hope that it wouldn't sell because I don't want publishers getting lazy.

What do you think they would add ? Another 2 or 3 lvls ? mabye a new boss ? would that warrent 50$ more

If all the DS had was N64 ports, then surely the DS would lose a lot of its appeal.

Of course , but it doesn't . Actually the only ports out right now are ridge racer , mario ds and rayman (dc ) . The ds has the original titles with a few ports to flush out its library .

The only two orignal games from the psp that i know of are lumenarys and mecuray . So its very much the other way around for sony .

Why would you? You've been arguing about how recent titles lessen the appeal for a portable?

I knew you wanted a yes from me . But apparently all you read was the yes and not the part where I said "and had original games along with a good balance of gamecube games " IF it had a good balance like the ds has then yea i would pick it up . Though i most likely would be playing my ds more . HOpefully the gcn portable if it does come out keeps the dual screen . I'm really enjoying the touch pad . Some of the games are amazing .

Sorry to hear that. Did you pay a thing for them or were they gifts of a sort?

Its alright , everyone is safe . One was from japan . It had a bad battery though , i bought it and the other was from the site in my sig .

Sony fans"? You're always saying this forum is filled with Sony fans, give me the name of 5 of them who has claimed this.

They are in posts that are still in the console forum but i would have to dig them out .

Actually it's very easy to abandon an indirect upgrade path. But Nintendo isn't going to abandon it.

I disagree . Nintendo makes moeny off the ds even at 150$ . People who's gba and sp that die or batterys go bad or are damage will most likely go to the ds than another gba . Esp since they are going to stop producing the cheaper old style gba .

I doubt nintendo will ever get rid of it . The sp will be phased out most likely as the ds hits 100$

Agreed. This has to be easier for consumers.

Its not that it has to be easier (As its very easy ) its just the time and the cost . Not many people want to buy a 1 gig memory stick to watch a movie at a good res. See that screen is really nice. But if you try and squeeze the bit rate and res of a video the screen is also very unforgiving because of its quality .

Nintendo have been kings in this field for several generations without any real competition so absolutely Nintendo is the undisputed champion. Did I ever state otherwise?

No and i never stated that you did now did i .

You know, people tried telling me the same thing when PSX came out. "Nintendo's going to crush Sony."

well the nintendo 64 did sell more than the psx . I think even the virtual boy did though i'm not too sure

Only once have I stooped to telling someone "I told you so." Check back in a year or two and see how generous I'm feeling then.

As i said its for this very reason that sony wont unseat nintendo for a long time .

When the psone came out Nintendo was very weak . They were fighting sega for many years and no longer had a solid grasp of the market . Sega miss judged the market and put out a power house of a 3d system and quickly changed course and added 3d hardware . The nintendo 64 was late . It was perfect timing for sony and they played it well .

With the ps2 , sega was almost bankrupt , it was hard for them to do anything (Though they did good all things considering and the ds has a ton of tripple a games ) . Nintendo was late once again and the xbox was late and to expensive to compete .

This generation may be diffrent. It will be sony thats late to the party , Ms will have the head start , good solid franchises and a ton of support. Not to mention that the console may scale quicker in price than the ps3 .
Then nintendo should launch around the ps3 and who knows may have more power than the ps3 or may even have an inovative feature that might draw people too it .

WIll it be enough for ms to take the market ? no not at all unless there are big problems with the ps3 . But will it allow ms to double thier market share ? most likely .


In the handhelds nintendo has been alone for a very long time . Thier brand for gameboy is much stronger than the playstaion brand . They have a system out that has good graphics and unique controlls . They also have backwards compatiblity with the gba .

I would think the psp would be like the xbox . A decent first attempt but in the end no serious threat and a building point for the next system .

IF you look at sales charts the ds is far out and with the games coming its only going to move further ahead

 

[rabidrabbit]

Aren't many of the PSP "PS2 ports" you people keep bringing in actually PSOne ports?

Ridge Racers.
It was on PSOne and the PSP version has many of the same tracks as the PSOne RR's.
It actually has more content in common with Ridge Racer, Rage Racer, and Ridge Racer 4 on PSOne , than Ridge Racer V on PS2

WipeOut Pure.
It goes back to the original WO in gameplay, an also has some of the tracks of WO2097.

Well, that's just two games, but they are the most popular ones at the moment.

 

[pahcman]

wipeout rocks! fun furios and challeging. comes with free net browser too. a must buy imo. fact i use more browser than game. my pc is not accessible not my room, so wipeout is helpful to read up on pages update, mostly text.

lumines is okay, more flashy tertis lesser stratgey or im not getting it. short burst game is all psp about, so good, but wish loading is not that bad. its not evil, but its still there.

mercury suck aviod all cost, unless want to break psp and analog stick.

 

[PC-Engine]

From Phil's post Wipeout only runs at 30fps so that's something to consider.

 

[Kolgar]

As for a GCP, a hypothetical straight GCP is a more attractive idea than the PSP because if you own a GCN you'd only need to buy one game and be able to play it on both machines.

Yep, a portable GC would rock the house for sure. I still think Nintendo could do it, too. They should do it. I'd buy one.

If you want to take the GCP idea even further, what about a single touch screen GCP with gyroscopic control? That would be even more attractive. With this you'd have the same benefit mentioned above and at the same time also have the benefit of offering something new.

OK, sure - show me why I need touch screens and gyroscopic controls, convince me they add something new and fun to games, and I'll buy it. Simple as that.

My problem with DS is that I simply haven't seen compelling examples of "gotta-have-it" game innovation in the software. It seems like Nintendo put the cart before the horse. They came up with these gimmicky features and told developers, "think up ways to use them" instead of designing specific features to address existing, specific gameplay needs.

And as I said, DS offers little to nothing for me personally. I'm sorry, the games just skew too young for me. I'm 35, an old man for crying out loud, and I'm more likely to play a Tamagotchi-type game if the "pet" in question is a Mercedes or an F1 supercar, you know what I mean?

Thank you for polite and straightfoward question. I know it was probably tempting to try and smoke me.

 

[PC-Engine]

OK, sure - show me why I need touch screens and gyroscopic controls, convince me they add something new and fun to games, and I'll buy it. Simple as that.

It would be missing the point to just describe what could be done not to mention an injustice. The appreciation comes from actually playing the games that put these features to use. You'd have to experience it really. For example take a look at the simple vibration pack incorporated into a controller that has done wonders for gaming. That's why every controller that comes with a console has rumble now. If I had described this rumble feature to someone they wouldn't be able to fully appreciate it.

Seriously, if you tried some games and still do not like them then you do not like them it's not a big deal. I cannot convince you buy one, in fact I don't want you to buy one without testing it out first, otherwise you'd just be disappointed if you end up not liking it, but you have to give it a try before writing it off as gimmicks. I only have one game that utilizes the touch screen Feel the Magic and it's a very fun game. Everyone who has tried it says the same. There's nothing like it. After I played it I wanted more games like it. It's simply fun. The graphics had very little to do with how much fun it is.

 

[pahcman]

OT or not.

i said psp is not worth the hype and price with defect rates..still same opinoions. but choosing DS or PSP. i take PSP. sorry nintendo. but GBA still best.

maybe GBA2 with awesome screen, more compact touchscreen use hispeed carts and real awesome 2D, wow! PSP 3D really jaggies, i hope GBA2 if 3D, use a good FSAA GPU. 2D on PSP screen rock! Lumines sharp and rich.

i feel its typical sony coming out with goods really striking first sight...with form of incompleteness. the rivals will come out with something more rounded but less striking.

 

[see colon]

It doesn't seem to me that the DS has many games coming out period. Or not as much I'd like anyhow.

while i agree with this statement, i wouldn't use that in an argument for the psp. there are easily twice the number of games in the pipe for the DS than the PSP. and look at this month's releases

DS
star wars ep III (5/4)
puyo pop fever (5/3)
need for speed underground 2 (5/10)
madagascar (5/23)


PSP
hot shots golf(5/3)
smart bomb (5/10)

the few games the DS has amounts to twice the games coming out for PSP. you can argue quality and appeal (i won't be buying madagascar, for example), but not quantity.

 

[hey69]

just taking this month as reference is realy a bad example.

someone at gaming-age has a more detailed list .. it's about 200+- for ds an,d 200+- psp games coming out this year...

 

[see colon]

does that include UMD movies? the lists i've seen show 60 or so titles in the pipe for psp thus far for this year. i'm sure more will be announced at e3. i have a hard time swallowing that 200 games are going to come out for either handheld in the next 7 months.

just some quick math that's about 30 games a month... and i'm pretty sure there's not 30 games coming out next month.

 

[mech]

Kolgar, question for you. What happens when SONY decides that a touchscreen is essential for the future of their PSP handheld line and incorporates one? Will you still shun it?

Not going to happen - how long has Nintendo been king of the hill? 16 years? Without a touchscreen? obviously PSP needs one, stat!!!

Never mind that PSP actually has better input methods than DS, such as an analog stick and more buttons (which are more comfortable no less!)

Mp3 playback , video playback , movie umd play back ... these are all gimmicks

funny, I'm loving all of these "gimmicks" and using them regularly. They were "gimmicky" enough for Nintendo to release a catridge for GBA/DS to allow you to play MP3s and movies...

But how many people will be willing to pay for all these games when they will be playable on the ps2 / 3 at little to no cost (already owned or cheaply sold as the ps3 is out )

I LOVE being able to play games on the go, much more than at home, being able to have these games on the go, ready to go at a moment's notice and pause at any time is just so appealing so at least I'm there So what, because DS has a weird input method it's much better for people on the go...? Or because it's porting games that are already more than 5 years old? Because I don't get it...

Not to mention that any game on the psp can be put on the ds with only image quality change . Yet a ds game wont allways be put on a psp as there is no touch screen.

That's like saying HL2 was achievable on a Voodoo 2. Hey man, you can play HL2 without the great physics or graphics, but would it be as good a game? I don't think so.

And again, Nintendo managed to dominate the handheld market for this long without any touchscreen gimmickry (which actually makes handheld gaming more difficult, having to have a thumbstrap or stylus to play while you're on the go, wtf?)

The fact is that nintendo does have the touch screen + dual screen and sony doesn't have those inovations .

No, Sony's got a better screen, better hardware (for physics, graphics and sound) and better input methods. Much more important than a touchscreen gimmick imo.

What do you think they would add ? Another 2 or 3 lvls ? mabye a new boss ? would that warrent 50$ more

The ports on PSP you were whining about before added more than that.

The only two orignal games from the psp that i know of are lumenarys and mecuray . So its very much the other way around for sony .

And the original games I know of by Nintendo are.. erm.. uh.. yeah.

Whinging about "original games" is such a fallacy, it's about how fun the gameplay is, not about whether it's a sequel. After all, if an artist releases a new album you don't say "oh geeze, not this guy again".

the other was from the site in my sig .

I find it really repugnant that a mod is trying to get referals through his sig to some pyramid scheme, but maybe that's just me.

But if you try and squeeze the bit rate and res of a video the screen is also very unforgiving because of its quality .

What??? You're giving shit to the screen because it's too good? WTF?

I copped heaps of shit for saying that RE4 looked shit through a good display, Nintendo fanboys can't make up their mind

When the psone came out Nintendo was very weak .

That's an utter lie. For example, Donkey Kong Country sold millions and millions of units, despite playstation.

Thier brand for gameboy is much stronger than the playstaion brand .

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt.

They have a system out that has good graphics and unique controlls .

Unique and awkward. Sony has a console out with much better graphics, sound and control.

I would think the psp would be like the xbox . A decent first attempt but in the end no serious threat and a building point for the next system .

Except that PSP far outclasses what Nintendo has to offer, whereas Xbox struggled for games at first, and was only marginally more powerful than PS2.

the few games the DS has amounts to twice the games coming out for PSP. you can argue quality and appeal (i won't be buying madagascar, for example), but not quantity.

ahahhaa, you're comparing 4 games against 2, and one of which has already come out on PSP...... Such a shit comparison, sorry

Read what hey69 wrote

 

[see colon]

Never mind that PSP actually has better input methods than DS, such as an analog stick and more buttons (which are more comfortable no less!)

what? the psp and the DS have the sam amount of buttons, unless you are counting the volume buttons. and the ngage has more buttons than both the PSP and DS combined. it's awsome, lol.

ahahhaa, you're comparing 4 games against 2, and one of which has already come out on PSP...... Such a shit comparison, sorry

Read what hey69 wrote

i'm going to shout so you can understand what i said. NEITHER SYSTEM HAS BEEN RELEASING ENOUGH GAMES. the ds is releasing twice the amount of games this moth than the psp is, and somehow that's bad. yes, it's a 2:4 sperad, it's still twice as many.

hey69's source thinks that both systems are going to each have an average of 28 games a month till the end of the year. i highly doubt it.

you make reference to nintendo fanboys taking things that you think are great about the psp and considering them weaknesses, then you do the exact same thing when talking about releases.

 

[PC-Engine]

Not going to happen - how long has Nintendo been king of the hill? 16 years? Without a touchscreen? obviously PSP needs one, stat!!!

Never mind that PSP actually has better input methods than DS, such as an analog stick and more buttons (which are more comfortable no less!)

That's in the past, things change.

If Evolution has a touchscreen like DS and it becomes standard like rumble packs then SONY will jump on that bandwagon. It's common sense really. Why do you think analog control and rumble packs are standard on home consoles now???

 

[Kolgar]

Wow, jvd, looks like you sparked a firestorm with this post! Hehehehe.

Mp3 playback , video playback , movie umd play back ... these are all gimmicks . At least the touch screen has added to games in a unqiue way and in doing so moved the main reason to have a hand held portable system foward . That being to play games .

Please, quit trying to rationalize the situation to make it seem like Nintendo always knows best. It doesn't. And you're completely wrong about music and movies being gimmicks. Hello? It's called convergence. It's the way things are going, and it's what people want. I did, and I didn't even know it until Sony's PSP. Now I'm bringing music, movies, and games with me to work, on road trips, to the barber shop - and I'm loving it.

Here's the difference between PSP's features and DS's gimmicks. After PSP, I can't go back to no PSP. I won't give up my music and movies on the go. But I'll be damned if a touch stylus is going to change my life, or even be applicable to most types of games.

Not to mention that any game on the psp can be put on the ds with only image quality change . Yet a ds game wont allways be put on a psp as there is no touch screen.

Yup, sounds like a line of Nintendo PR. Oh, well, if the thought comforts you...

There are more psp games but the quality lvl (Aside from graphics ) are lower than that of the ds .

I find this "quality" mantra a tired argument that Nintendophiles have used since the PSX days. But quality alone is not enough, and anyway, die-hard Nintendophiles seem to define quality differently than everybody else. Too often it seems to be, "Nintendo = quality. Not Nintendo = no quality." It's crap.

Aside from that in the comming months you get some huge titles that stress all the features of the ds . Nintendodogs (mic +touch) , metriod (touch screen + wifi ) golden eye (touch screen + wifi ) animal cross (all the features )

Two of those titles (Nintendodogs and Animal Crossing) help prove my point that DS is aimed at a different audience than PSP - a younger market, a niche market. Look, I just spent two hours in a hair salon and I snuck in several rounds of golf on my PSP. People came over and looked at it, saying how cool it was. That's attention I don't mind. But I would never have pulled out a DS and Nintendodogs and started talking to it in that place - well, maybe if I was 12.

Would you read a book and then a few weeks later buy the book again in paper back and read it again ? Even a few months later and I know you still wouldn't . You would say hey i own it already and i can still play it whenever i want (ps3) might as well spend my money on a new game.... oh wait these are 90% ports so there aren't many new games to choose from .

Again - a popular anti-PSP sentiment that's both incorrect and reeking of Nintendo PR boolsheet. Open your mind and acknowledge that most of PSP's games offer new and different content, even if they are sequels to games that appeared on PS2.

Once again the what are you more likely to read . The book you read last year or the book you haven't read in 9 years ?

Invalid. Books don't change. PSP's games offer new and different content the PS2 versions didn't have, so it's not the exact same experience. Nintendo's doing the same thing with the Mario 64 DS port - it's not exactly the same as Mario 64, because that would be a ripoff.

Besides, Nintendo's not porting Mario 64 to DS because it was the best idea. They did it because the DS's capabilities are a lot closer to N64 than Gamecube. The decision results from limitations of the hardware, not because Nintendo's loath to rehash a game. Lord knows, Nintendo's fine with rehashes.

The only two orignal games from the psp that i know of are lumenarys and mecuray . So its very much the other way around for sony .

What, no Untold Legends? Metal Gear Acid has a new spin.

Twisted Metal, Wipeout, and Hot Shots are all arguably the very best games in their respective series. And they're beloved series that helped PSX steal the market from Nintendo. Sounds appealing to me - that's why I bought 'em.

well the nintendo 64 did sell more than the psx . I think even the virtual boy did though i'm not too sure

Dude, I'm talking about the original PlayStation. It was code-named PS-X during its development, and the name stuck until Sony released the PSone. Forget that white bastardized PSX - I'm sure Sony's trying to.

As i said its for this very reason that sony wont unseat nintendo for a long time .

When the psone came out Nintendo was very weak . They were fighting sega for many years and no longer had a solid grasp of the market .

What crap! If Nintendo lost its way in the 90s, it's their own damn fault. They weren't "weak" from battle with Sega, and if they were, that doesn't say very much for them. The fact is, Sega outmarketed them and Nintendo made dumb mistakes like CENSORING Mortal Kombat. All in the name of family entertainment - a quaint, 1950s concept that's hurting them to this day.

Sega miss judged the market and put out a power house of a 3d system and quickly changed course and added 3d hardware . The nintendo 64 was late . It was perfect timing for sony and they played it well .

Again, Nintendo screwed themselves. Why were they late? I remember them delaying the console at least twice while I waited anxiously for it. It nearly broke my heart every time they made an announcement. Finally, I got tired of waiting. I began to see a pattern - they didn't have their shit together. This was Nintendo's market to lose and they lost it on their own.

With the ps2 , sega was almost bankrupt , it was hard for them to do anything (Though they did good all things considering and the ds has a ton of tripple a games ) . Nintendo was late once again and the xbox was late and to expensive to compete .

Why is Nintendo always late? Are they stupid? Not likely. What then? I think they like to milk the hell out of their systems. "Sorry, N64's delayed until next April, but here, we're giving you Killer Instinct to play on your Super NES!" Same with the handheld market. Nintendo's fallen woefully behind Sony technologically because they rested on their laurels and just collected bushels of cash from the mobs of Gameboy users.

Enter Sony, and now Nintendo's got competition. Their schedule's all messed up, they have to actually get off their duffs or they'll lose gamers. How sad for them.

You know, people accuse Sony and Microsoft of shady tactics, while praising Nintendo for always thinking of the gamers. But I think Nintendo does a disservice when it milks a Gameboy for 10 years, offering few innovations the entire time, while the cash register rings and rings because hey - we've got a monopoly! - why push ourselves?

This generation may be diffrent. It will be sony thats late to the party , Ms will have the head start , good solid franchises and a ton of support. Not to mention that the console may scale quicker in price than the ps3 .

Then nintendo should launch around the ps3 and who knows may have more power than the ps3 or may even have an inovative feature that might draw people too it .

How can you be sure that Nintendo won't be late? I can't remember the last time they were on time with a home console release - Super NES, N64, Gamecube - all late.

And one "innovative feature" isn't going to be enough to sway gamers to Nintendo. I've said it before and I'll say it again, they've got a positioning problem. People perceive them as being for kids. Sega exploited this in the early 90s just as Sony did in the late 90s. Nintendo's not seen as "cool," and until they fix that, they have a problem.

I also hope their new innovations for Revolution are a little more practical and appealing than the innovations in the DS. Or you'll see Revolution become more of a niche console than any Nintendo system before.

In the handhelds nintendo has been alone for a very long time . Thier brand for gameboy is much stronger than the playstaion brand .

Hardly. "PlayStation" is one of the most recognizable brands in the history of brands. It's also chic. Neither can be said for Gameboy. (Which I think is another reason Nintendo experimented with dropping the Gameboy moniker from DS, which is nothing if not a Gameboy with two screens and other features.)

I would think the psp would be like the xbox . A decent first attempt but in the end no serious threat and a building point for the next system .

If Nintendo thinks as you do, they're going to be in deep sh*t very shortly.

IF you look at sales charts the ds is far out and with the games coming its only going to move further ahead

Again, it'll take some time, but PSP will make inroads. If this isn't a repeat of the way PSX stole the console market from Nintendo, I'll eat my hat.

 

[Teasy]

Kolgar

In any case, DS and PSP aren't actually going at each other head to head, are they? You can almost liken it to when PSX came out. Nintendo had delayed N64 and Super NES was still holding down the fort. Was PSX's primary competition the Super NES? No, it was the N64, just as soon as Nintendo got around to releasing it.

Many products are priced differently, many offer extra features that one or the other don't support. Its a nonsense to say they aren't competing based on this. As for being aimed at different markets, that's just a convenient excuse.

Your comparison is totally wonky BTW. The SNES had been out for 5 years before PS1 came out. The DS is a new handheld that was released only months before PSP. If anything its the GBA that's comparable to the SNES, the DS certainly isn't.

Because I'm not sure it's selling for those reasons. How many games actually use the DS's unique features to deliver gaming experiences heretofore unseen in gaming? Not very many, is my understanding. From what I gather, the DS-specific software has been slow in coming, though that situation seems to be improving now.

On launch games like Project Rub, and soon after quite a few more. I'm not going to check back and list these games unless you really want me too. Currently the system is outselling PSP by such a large margin in Japan because of Nintendogs. A game which uses all of DS's features (touch screen, microphone ect).

I'll readily admit it; I don't like the DS. It just doesn't appeal to me as a consumer. I see no pressing need for two screens in a game console. I can't see myself poking at a game machine with a pen or talking to it via a microphone. And the games skew young as always. Perhaps if Nintendo offered more content I liked, I'd be more open to DS's new features.

So what though? The PSP doesn't interest me. I see it as all style and no content, a soulless attempt to wow people with a flashy design and powerful graphics. But I don't go around being super negative about PSP. I don't post about how I think its only been released for this reason or its only selling for that reason ect. Sorry but not being interested in something isn't grounds for bad mouthing it at every opportunity.

Who ever said anything about the MegaDrive? I didn't. And anyway, I know it was 16-bit, just as I know that N64 was 64-bit.

Ok there seems to be some confusion here. You said that before PSP all that had been offered in the handheld market were 16 bit graphics. I then asked you if you thought DS only had 16 bit graphics and you said it only had n64 quality graphics ect. So I am pointing out to you that the N64 was not from the 16 bit era, I brought up the MegaDrive as a example of the 16 bit era.

I'll have to take your word on it that DS is "at least" N64 quality. From the videos I've seen, DS appears to have trouble rendering 3D as smoothly as N64.

Yeah you should take my word for it until you actually play some games on the DS. You should also stop making assumptions on why other people buy the system, certainly until you actually play the DS..

 

[Ty]

The ports would have to be high quality and they aren't . The launch line up and whats out now is just okay . When you get mgs2 and the other triple aaa titles then you have something to go on .

That's not the argument. Your argument was that once the next generation of consoles come out, the PSP loses luster. All I was saying is that Xenon could come out today and games like Wipeout and RR don't automatically look worse. It will still be the most powerful portable console till either the GBA2 or "XboxGo" comes out.

Mp3 playback , video playback , movie umd play back ... these are all gimmicks .

And why are they gimmicks? It's because they haven't been used much or widely adopted by the public. If there were 10k UMD movie titles and people were buying them, would it be a gimmick then?

At least the touch screen has added to games in a unqiue way and in doing so moved the main reason to have a hand held portable system foward . That being to play games .

And how many games have truly used the touchscreen to create a new feel? 3? Heck, only now is the Microphone being used (Nintendogs). Does that mean it's a gimmick? Again, the point is a feature IS a gimmick until it reaches some sort of mass market acceptance. If no other games ever use the touchscreen, then it's a gimmick imo. Not that this will happen mind you, I think the touchscreen is and will be a good feature. All I'm saying, is that you're judging too soon.

But how many people will be willing to pay for all these games when they will be playable on the ps2 / 3 at little to no cost (already owned or cheaply sold as the ps3 is out )

I have no idea. Like I said, if the PSP versions don't offer anything new, then I wouldn't. I certainly wouldn't have bought the DS Mario if it didn't add anything new over the N64 version I have.

Not to mention that any game on the psp can be put on the ds with only image quality change . Yet a ds game wont allways be put on a psp as there is no touch screen.

Completely incorrect. Touchscreen controls could easily be duplicated (albeit clumsily) via the analog nub. You're better off chosing the microphone as a feature for your argument. And I dare say the difference in image quality would be quite large.

<Snip>

I agree with the quality vs. quantity argument wholeheartedly.

Not at all. The game will stil lbe good but if you've just beaten it , your not going to rush out to beat it again .

Again, all you're doing is saying the games on the PSP are exactly the same as they were on the PS2. This is untrue. But if the games WERE exactly the same, then I don't think they'd sell either (if people already owned the PS2 version.) I also think this is true for the DS, if I own the N64 version AND the DS version is identical, screw it, I'm not buying it. I don't care how long ago it was.

<snip stuff related to the above>

I'm pretty aware of old games. I just think it's funny for you to argue that older is better and that "fresher" is worse. If that is the case then the further back you go, the better. Why buy a DS which is relatively fresh compared to the original gameboy?

You can't get a new ds .

What the heck are you talking about? I can get a DS ANYWHERE for $149.95.

Aside from that your making crap up now . new isn't worse than old . Except when talking about tripple a titles the port from the ps2 will be newer and freshly played vs the port for the n64 which most likely hasn't been played in longer.

You mean, except when it fits your line of arguing that PSP is so powerful that it can play PS2 games which is obviously bad because we already have PS2 games. I'm not making anything up, you state quite clearly that fresh = bad, old = good.

Once again the what are you more likely to read . The book you read last year or the book you haven't read in 9 years ?

Then my question to you still stands. Why buy a DS when the original gameboy allows you to play 'the classics!"?

<snip more stuff related to EXACT ports vs. New PSP content - an argument I've beat to death previously>

what does this have to do with anything . The fact is that nintendo does have the touch screen + dual screen and sony doesn't have those inovations .

Ok, let me try it this way then to get you to understand my point.

PRETEND the DS was just a portable N64, no new features.

Now which would you argue is better? The DS (no touchscreen, etc.) or the PSP?

This can only help to put a new spin on those old games. The psp will have to stay with the ports .

This is part of the argument I'm making, that without NEW content of a sort, BOTH the DS & PSP lack appeal.

The system wouldn't be better , but the library would . Not because the games are better quality but because haven't been enjoyed in a long period of time and thus the experiance would be fresher than playing a game that you just beat a few months ago .

So basically Sony should have just created a PS1 portable?

<snip stuff related to the above question>

What do you think they would add ? Another 2 or 3 lvls ? mabye a new boss ? would that warrent 50$ more

I would hope it would add a lot more frankly. Where you draw that line is tough.

Oddly enough, UL on the PSP is/was the top selling game at EB and/or Gamestop at one point. That certainly is EXTREMELY similar to Champions and yet people still bought UL. So apparently quite a few people are willing to buy the same game.

I knew you wanted a yes from me . But apparently all you read was the yes and not the part where I said "and had original games along with a good balance of gamecube games " IF it had a good balance like the ds has then yea i would pick it up . Though i most likely would be playing my ds more . HOpefully the gcn portable if it does come out keeps the dual screen . I'm really enjoying the touch pad . Some of the games are amazing .

Now you're understanding my point that both the DS and the PSP need new exclusive content to spur sales. If all the DS had were N64 ports, then the DS would suck, imo. Yes, it's quite possible the PSP is lacking new titles right now - that would not surprise me in the least.

<snip>

Agreed. This has to be easier for consumers.

Its not that it has to be easier (As its very easy ) its just the time and the cost . Not many people want to buy a 1 gig memory stick to watch a movie at a good res. See that screen is really nice. But if you try and squeeze the bit rate and res of a video the screen is also very unforgiving because of its quality .

When I say "easier" I refer to any form that acts as a "barrier to entry". This includes price.

No and i never stated that you did now did i .

Then I don't know why you brought it up when replying to me.

while i agree with this statement, i wouldn't use that in an argument for the psp. there are easily twice the number of games in the pipe for the DS than the PSP. and look at this month's releases

You misread my argument. I wasn't saying this as a reason TO buy a PSP, I was merely countering jvd's assertion that the DS has a good mix/a good amount of games coming out soon. In fact I believe neither has enough original content yet (again, imo). I also wouldn't look just a single month. A 6 month forecast is probably more telling at this point.

FWIW - I own neither a DS or PSP. No real inclination towards either at this moment as for me, the games just aren't there yet.