The demise of the n64 was more self-inflicted than Sony marketing driven: carts vs CDs, bad 3rd party treatment vs Sony red carpet, etc. The question here for the PSP is whether it can expand the current portable market. Clearly because 70% of the portable market is under 18, only a fraction of that will have the disposable income or parental leverage to get a $300 dollar portable. So Sony has to (1) take over 18 market from Nintendo, and (2) expand the number of people over 18 who play portables. I think that they stand to a chance to do a little of both (1) and (2) but I don't think they have a chance to do enough of either to build a customer base that will buy enough games to support game development. With the low tie in ratio of the portable world, you need a larger installed base as compared to consoles to have a self-sufficient market. At the very least I see PSP as Sony's XBox. They know that the system will never be profitable, but they are doing what they have to do out of (1) Ego, and (2) Longterm investment. They can only hope to profit on PSP2. But there is the danger that they end up like XBox in Japan: a total collapse of a marketable system which is only supported by PS2 revenue.
I don't think the psp will be as successful as the playstion . Not untill it hits the 100$ mark and even then its doubtfull.
If you say so. ...and I've heard it'll be around $40... It probably will as I've heard there's two protocols the 802.11 and a proprietary one. It would make sense since DS also plays GBA games.
Re: A vote for the DS Though (re)moving the UI from the normal world view could be considered a good thing, it might also mean more of a hassle because now your eye could be forced to look away at vital statistics (hopefully if they go this route they'll split the UI amongst the two screens rather than placing it all on the upper one). WRT maps, I usually find the HUD map sufficient and the larger Metroid map shown for the DS seems to be an awful waste of space. Here's hoping that it can zoom out a bit and then be useful. I sure hope so since the current examples are very ho-hum imo. Dynamic UI? The touchscreen is the bottom one right? Isn't the bottom one also the main 3D view? So basically you'll be moving your thumbs from the digital pad (boo hiss for 3d games!) or the buttons to use the touch pad to do what exactly? In other words, the touchpad offers no more of a dynamic UI than the buttons - you're just clicking different "buttons". Is complex gameplay a good thing though? Nintendo is notoriously anti-complex - and for good reason I might add. You mean, when/if they come out. I can do that now. You mean, when/if they come out. Nintendo has already won the war! Heck, it might even be more expensive than that. Still the price of the PSP is going to hurt it, no doubt. That's the point though. Sony is NOT marketing this solely at the portable gaming sector. It's meant to transcend the sector. Will it succeed? I don't know. What I do know, is that it is by far the better looking one. I think this is a fair guess. Only time will tell I guess. And how many consoles can claim that in the first place? At $100 the PSP would sell better than crack. If you can't afford $100 for the PSP, Sony couldn't care less about you since you can't buy their games anyhow. Stick to Yahoo games.
hmm in thier own time periods many have sold equal to the success of the playstation , pong , atari , nes , genesis /super nes we also don't know how long it will take for it to drop to a 100. But case in point . It plays the best portable games 3d graphics wise. Its movie playback is worse than cheaper dvd players . I.e you have to rebuy movies or buy them only for your psp. WHile for 200$ u can buy a dvd portable (which will also playback mp3s ) For mp3s . Well i can get a 256 meg mp3 player for under 60$ now and a mini ipod with 4 gigs storage for 250$ . Not only that but an ipod is much better suited for what u would normaly listen to music for . I.e while running or walking . So i don't really think sony is going to apeal to other markets . I believe that those features will not affect the sales but after the fact some people may become interested in it .
Crossover devices lend enough appeal. I was quite interested in the whole N-Gage deal until the hardware showed up in crappy shape and the games a big yawn... The Tapwave Zodiac makes a lot of sense because hey... if you're going to get a PDA anyway, why not make it a cool one for gaming? A flash MP3 player with an FM radio is more appealing than a unit without, regardless of how often I plan on using it. Options are good, and consumers tend to like more of 'em. ^_^ The main sticking point will come from whether or not people WANT portable movies, and in what form they'll go for it. That's the untested one on the public at large, and something which the PSP has a number of advantages (at least over any other gaming unit. Disadvantages over dedicated portable video devices). Will the people go for it? <shrugs> Price will certainly come into play there. And this round seems like it's upping the stake. N-Gage is still $199, and Tapwave is EXPENSIVE. The DS looks like it'll be $150-200 and the PSP $200-250... Gonna be a funkitty round.
That's the point I've been repeating over and over, but no one seems to listen. Play PSO with the full map on and zoomed out and you'll understand what I've been saying all along. In PSO played on a tv set the main action screen is reduced in size to almost a quarter of the screen while the map takes up a large portion of the tv screen. If you have two screens like DS this doesn't happen ie the action screen is full size and so is the map screen. In certain games like Metroid or PSO you have to go back to the same areas and this is where the realtime zoom out fullscreen map becomes indispensible. Having a fullscreen transparent map overlay on all the time is annoying because it blocks your view if you have a detailed map. Toggling it on/off every few seconds to see where you're going is even more annoying. With dual screens you just have to glance down every few seconds to see where you're going.
Frankly, I find overlay maps to be fine--in some respects better than having them on a different screen. "Gets in the way" and "you have to remove your eyes from the action screen entirely" are just different flavors of annoying--and both have effects on the game flow. Corner-screen maps are probably the least-intrusive of them... just smaller, so on the smaller screen of a portable device would be pretty harsh. (Depends on the screen.) Zooming and on/off toggling is pretty standard and ultimately acceptable no matter what format is being used. Absolutely nothing gets anywhere near "indespensible" since the game-types so far have all been done before, and have seemingly managed fine so far with their current methods. Developers will tweak them to the games as appropriate, but it's hardly going to be a game-breaking or genre-shifting capability. At least not in its current form.
So you've played a game where the map was on a second screen? BTW I'm not taking about a tiny little overlay. PSO has a little overlay map in the corner of the screen too but it's only useful for a small area. It's pretty usless for finding your way to a remote location in a large area. Unless you've played PSO, you have no idea what I'm talking about. Regardless a DETAILED FULLSCREEN overlay map being ON all the time definitely obscures the screen, there's no if, buts about it. Toggling is acceptable for games that don't require a REALTIME MAP!!! Unless you've got a photographic memory, you'll be toggling the map on/off like there's no tommorrow. You think people who play PSO like to toggle the fullsize map on/off? If it didn't take up a third of the tv screen while reducing the action screen, people would have it on ALL the time. An no they wouldn't want the map overlay on the whole friggin screen either. What's the point of having beautiful graphics if it's going to be obscured by a damn map??? BTW it's been accepted because not until now do we have games using one whole screen for a realtime map. There wasn't a choice before, so of course it's accepted
I wish I had a second monitor that could display the world map or dungeon map while I'm playing Anarchy Online. I wish I had a second TV for a fullscreen map when I'm playing PSO. I wish I had a second screen for the map when exploring the worlds of Metroid or Castlevania! I would love a fullscreen rear view mirror in Mario Kart I do think some people here underestimate the convenience of for example a map on the second screen. It seems so simple, so unrevolutionary, and yet it's so very nice to have, something I've been wishing I had for a long time. I have a laptop right next to my PC, I often use it to display world maps of games I am playing. If only they were updated real-time by the game! That would be perfect. I think I'm going to love the DS. Now what we need is a Gamecube with dual-TV support!
Ok folks, I'm going to let you guys in on a little secret. I'm planning to leave software development after the PSP comes out in order to market a revolutionary new product for the PSP. It's called the "dual-o-matic"(tm) and turns the PSP from the innovation lacking piece of rubbish it clearly is at the moment and gives the machine that second dedicated screen it clearly needs. It will come in the form of a user installable "kit", consisting of a 10 page instruction booklet, a voucher for money off against the book I'm writing entitled "money for old rope", and a thin strip of black masking tape. Once installed you can run any "dual-o-matic"(tm) enabled game and be able to do incredible things, such as view maps, and.. well I'm sure the developers will think of *something*. It'll be great. We admit that the basic model will mean games which don't take full advantage of the "dual-o-matic"(tm) system might suffer from having a big black line down the middle of the display, but we are also planning the "dual-o-matic Deluxe"(tm) which may or may not include a shiny, non-stick plastic strip and some velcro pads. You can sign up for this incredible advance soon. Just stick a wad of money in an envelope and post it to me. Address details to follow...
I'm really beginning to warm up towards the DS. Last night I saw some videos of various DS games on IGN, filmed up close at E3, which all looked great, graphics and gameplay wise. One thing I noticed, was that DS definitely has perspective correction! Funny how much better that made me feel towards the machine. Also texture resolution and number of polygons is more than a notch above N64. So, it only does point filtering, but if that means that they traded bilinear for a larger texture cache, and more fillrate, you won't hear me complaning. It won't even be that noticable on the small screen, and sometimes, IMO point filtering can have a strange charm to it, making the texture look more videogamie and "honest".
Re: A vote for the DS The map in Metroid Hunters visually displays enemies and information that you cannot see from a FPS perspective. How exactly is that a waste of space? Sounds more like invaluable tool. No, I would be moving my right hand away from the ABXY buttons in order to hit dynamic buttons on the touch screen that select pre-defined weapon configurations. For example, is it Castlevania Circle of Moon that uses a complex dual card system for power ups? It requires going to a subscreen and then navigation with the Dpad. It sucks. It takes time. However, that COULD just be the touch of a few dynamic buttons away. There is no main 3D view with the DS. Each screen is equal in 3D capabilities; although one screen at a time is potentially useable to render complex 3D due to processing limitations. Complex gameplay is a good thing. Nintendo is not anti-complex. You think Pikmin isn't somewhat complex? Name a good console game that offers the complexity of RTS like Pikmin. They typically offer games that CAN be complex if the user takes advantage of the possibilites (and wants to win), but can be just picked up and played if that's what you want.
I wish nintendo had done that instead of LAN.....gamecube already has two video ports, let it output two seperate low res images as a cheap man's lan.(or at least have downloadable games like on the gba)
Almost all games, from MMO's to spread-out adventure games like Castlevania, have environs people get used to quickly, and in general quick looks at maps are all that's needed. For those that reveal bits as you go along (at which point rarely come back again, so require more map references) like the Baldur's Gate games, the running/toggling overlay maps work fine as well. I've certainly never met someone with any issue with them. "Indespensible" means something that cannot be done without, which these are decidedly not--yet. (Though they can be, and that's what I'm waiting to see signs of.) Sure I'd LIKE separate monitors to have a constantly-running map or to have a full-size stats/inventory screen running in every game, because why on earth not? Then again, if talking about PC games here, I'd rather have the game support stereoscopic views or completely different uses for my extra monitors, because it's new, not just a shift of convenience. (But hey, I'll let the map overlay one of my peripheral screens so it's not affecting the main gaming screen. ) Point is, I'd expect a "3rd pillar" to offer a change in the scope of games, not a change of convenience for the types of things we've already seen for ages. The DS could open up a broad landscape for strategy games (it makes even RTS-style games plausable, which it currently isn't in any real way on consles--portable or otherwise) and puzzle games, and hopefully a lot of new styles, and that's what has sadly been absent from the DS showings so far, and is what I was hoping the device would concentrate on from the beginning. Offhand, though, they seem to be merging it too closely to their GBA endeavor and cash in quickly, so the revolution will be slow in coming. THAT is what is disappointing. Not that certain things aren't "nice" or "handy," but that as a new and unique device it's starting off on the wrong footing from a game perspective.
Lol. And how many more have failed? True but that's not the point. You said that if it was sold at a $100 it wouldn't be successful as the playstation. Equating end sales to success, I think it would still sell zillions. This is a fair critique. Sure but you had to admit the example they've showed so far of Metroid is underwhelming. Doesn't the map/radar in Metroid Prime already do this? My point is that the "virtual buttons" on the screen simply represent other "buttons". You could concieveably do the same with more buttons that have that function mapped. In addition, you'd be saving screen space which is what you wanted the map on the upper screen to do in the first place. For some reason I thought one Arm powered one screen and the other powered the other screen. That is exactly what I mean. You are confusing complexity with depth imo, something that should be carefully presented to consumers after much thought.
So you admit that the psp could be one of the ones that fails ? Who would it sell to . The psp in a 12 year old and under (i'm willing to wager even up to 20 years old) would using a ceramic baseball . Both easily broken. Most portable gamers are children under 14. I would not buy my child a psp. It would break very quickly. So that leaves 14+ market which is very small for portables . yes thats why I said it
Did I ever guarantee that it would succeed (sell as much as the Playstation1?). No, my point about your statement was that the Playstation 1 was phenomenally successful, so if the PSP didn't sell quite as well as it, that is NOT saying it "failed" in the marketplace. First question that challenges your assumption. Portable "what"?
depends on how you define success. sure, some other systems have achieved success in the niche videogame market, but nothing like the mass appeal of the ps1. here's an example. here in the US i can walk into a grocery store and they have a handfull of ps1 titles for sale. i've never seen another console reach that point, nor did i expect the psx to. i do say so. i've seen it time and again, even in the face of clearly superior technology and/or gameplay. people still bought psx when the dreamcast was doing well. the release of the xbox and gamecube combined could not stop the momentum that ps2 had. other than the cart limitation the n64 was superior hardware. and the cart limitation wasn't as much of a limitation as far as achievable content was concerned (look at re2, all the fmv and voice from the psx version, although noticibly compressed). it was more cost prohibitive than anything else. and it's the "vs Sony red carpet" part of your statement that negates your argument. sure, nintendo's own mishaps might have eventualy been the undoing for n64, but it was the well marketed alternative offered by sony that drew developers and custmers away. c: -edit- fixed quotes