Nintendo Announces Dual-Screen Portable

More interesting news: DS is Stepping-stone as Nintendo Confirms Game Boy PSP Challenger:

http://spong.com/detail/news.asp?prid=6092

Stakes upped as Nintendo prepares to fight!
22nd Jan 2004
http://spong.com/x?art=6092

Nintendo Japan has made efforts to shed light on exactly where the NDS (Nintendo Dual Screen) handheld - revealed yesterday - fits into its broader portable gaming strategy.

Nintendo has been accused of complacency in the handheld market, remaining as it has without a serious challenger, and able to offload what is essentially outdated technology effortlessly onto an accepting consumer base. Sony, in announcing the PSP, turned this situation on its head and, for the first time, gamers realised that perhaps they should be expecting more from portable gaming hardware.

Anyway, at close of business in Japan today, Nintendo tried to explain exactly where the NDS fits into the plan, running - as it will - alongside future Game Boy development.

Nintendo of Japan spokesman and Miyamoto's translator sidekick Yasuhiro Minagawa said, ?We're not trying to take on PSP, because this machine will be completely different than anything that exists right now,? which is true, in terms of it having two screens. However, he continues, ?The next generation of Game Boy is well into its development. It will be this machine that competes directly with Sony?s PSP.?

So exactly what the DS is and what its purpose will be remains fairly unclear. It seems that Nintendo is planning what is essentially a spoiler launch to distract consumers from the lure of the PSP, buying itself some Game Boy development time in the process.

Stay tuned for updates in the coming days.

So if they're going to have a direct competitor to PSP, how late would y'all figure it would be able to come out and still 'compete'? If PSP is out by the end of the year, I would say N would have to get it out by Fall 2005. Can't let Sony have 2 Christmas' all to themselves. Interesting, though. Wonder when they'll announce it. Also interesting, is that if it competes with PSP for market share, that means price will probably be up around at least 180-200+ dollars. GCP, anyone?

Edit: originally linked to off of Rage3d. http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=efca26cca7aee7c3628043f38b29ad43&threadid=33737603
 
Fox5 said:
Well, anyhow, without high quality sound(probably snes or n64 quality, maybe dreamcast) and without voices and movies, many games could fit on nintendo's 128 MB carts. Wasn't Rogue Leader supposed to be only around 200 MB?
However, I could see sony trying to undercut nintendo's prices and selling the average PSP game for $20-$25.

Ikaruga for the Dreamcast is only 40MB... presumably the GC version is the same size.

I would believe that claim about Rogue Leader. If it's much bigger, they wouldn't have stuffed an enhanced version of it in with Rebel Strike, now would they!
 
Clashman: Interesting, but stupid. They're crazy if they're willing to put effort into a new console & getting developers interested.. just to buy time for the next GB. Is dulling the PSP hype by releasing an in-between handheld really a good idea?

On paper, I guess. It didn't work for the Dreamcast against the PS2, but that's a different story altogether.
 
I don't see the problem. If this thing is backwards compatabile with the gba and gb then there is no problem at all . If it replaces the gba sp at a 100$ bucks why would anyone have a problem ?

I know i wouldn't
 
I was going to add: perhaps this is the last of the original GB compatible line. They don't intend on making the successor to GB compatible with GB, and so they decide instead to make a last upgrade to the machine, both to continue the life of the existing GB series up through the PSP launch while not having to compete on a spec-per-spec basis with it, and also to make way for a new type of portable machine, maybe? Dunno, just a thought.
 
Clashman, Sp0ng is the only place that published that "we'll compete with PSP" quote, so take that 'translation' with a huge grain of salt. Other sites, like Gamespot, have the simillar quote which only says "we are working on the successor to Gameboy" which made no mention of PSP at all. Right now, Nintendo won't even acknowledge that PSP is in the same market as them to begin with, much less that they have to prepare equally powered answer for it - especially considering that they definitely won't be willing to compete in the same price range.
 
marconelly! said:
Clashman, Sp0ng is the only place that published that "we'll compete with PSP" quote, so take that 'translation' with a huge grain of salt. Other sites, like Gamespot, have the simillar quote which only says "we are working on the successor to Gameboy" which made no mention of PSP at all.

All the :?: seem to indicate that they just babelfished the japanese quote which is never a good idea...
 
nobie said:
heh, its like the portable version of the 32x

Lol. I hope you're wrong but my initial gut reaction was nearly the same. "They're making a what? It has..huh? So much for a portable GCN!"
 
I was going to add: perhaps this is the last of the original GB compatible line. They don't intend on making the successor to GB compatible with GB, and so they decide instead to make a last upgrade to the machine, both to continue the life of the existing GB series up through the PSP launch while not having to compete on a spec-per-spec basis with it, and also to make way for a new type of portable machine, maybe? Dunno, just a thought.

Hey that's not a bad theory.

But I think Nintendo is still deciding on wheather or not NDS will be GB compatible. If they decided it would than your theory kinda make sense.

But I don't think the theory is a good move for Nintendo.
 
Look my reasoning has allways been that a 200$ psp type device is not going to sell to young children .

Nintendo of course is not going to want to loose the 13-40 year old group that also plays hand helds .

Thus they made another upgrade to the gba (if its backwards compatable ) This is the ds . It wont be the most powerfull 3d handheld but it will run n64 ports easily . Which is easy money for nintendo like the nes and supernes games were .

Then they can make another system of at lead dreamcast power and sell it for 200$ and switch to a new media and not have to worry about backwards compatabilty .

Or this system could be more powerfull than we think and will give psp lvl graphics and cost less .
 
jvd said:
Or this system could be more powerfull than we think and will give psp lvl graphics and cost less .


.... According to the Theroem of Nintendo, which says they can manufacture better performance hardware at a lower cost? Just wondering....
 
london-boy said:
jvd said:
Or this system could be more powerfull than we think and will give psp lvl graphics and cost less .


.... According to the Theroem of Nintendo, which says they can manufacture better performance hardware at a lower cost? Just wondering....

Where does it say they can't ?

Sony is adding in alot of other crap. It will all cost money even if its an upgrade you have to buy . Because the current hardware needs to have the mobile phone parts built in . The media playback built in . It will all add to the cost.

We know that there is going to be a demo of an arm chip with mbx . We know mbx offers performance close to that of the psp graphics chip .

If nintendo uses a chip that will go into many other devices it will lower the cost . Esp at the start.

There are alot of ways the ds can cost less and perform as well as the psp .

Just because nintendo hasn't made a 3d handheld on par with the dreamcast doesn't mean they can't .
 
Well, performance costs money. If the features are not on par with PSP then it is not on par on a performance level, therefore the argument is null.

If they do a "gaming focused" handheld, i fear the handheld market will become like the console one, as in Nintendo being stuck in the dark ages while newer competitors beat their asses with newer and feature-rich hardware.
Personally i would rather buy a gaming+video+MP3+[other] device for £200 than a gaming-only device for £100. But that's just me, and anyway it aint gonna happen cuz i'm totally broke...

We'll have to see...
 
Offhand, I'm not sure they'd be selling the DS for $100 at launch. I'm they'd WANT to, but that would probably be shaving margins rather close at launch, and it would instantly conflict with their GBA-SP sales, meaning they'd have to shift its price point down to compensate, which loses them even more revenue on their most popular device. Offhand, I think they'd want to aim the DS at $150 at launch--which might look bad alongside the PS2 and Xbox (which will likely both cost that by then), but will be the "new and interesting" device, and they still cheaper portable options (along with their cheaper console option, and it's not like the GBA-SP has suffered from costing the same as the GameCube).

Even if the PSP comes out at $250 in the US (keeping the tentative price levels mentioned already, and knowing that the US typically equate's to england's pound-price in dollars. The yen-to-dollar discrepency would be a bit more than earlier launches to hit that, though), the DS would still be WELL underneath ("priced to move" by comparison) but not at typical rock-bottom Nintendo prices (gives it market perception of "higher-class/higher-performance," which of course it would be), and it would keep them from having to move the GBA immediately. They can always shift prices DOWN--but not up--so if their sales aren't as much as they would like after a while, they can boost that easily. (And still take advantage of the initial buzz and the Nintendo fans with more money. Hehe... Being a "kids" deviced and priced as such doesn't need to be an immediacy--just an eventuality.) Moving prices down quickly might strike the consumers as a "lack of confidence" move, though, so if they do go that way it's something they'd have to stick with for six months at least, I imagine. (That would be one of the only reasons I can think of to launch lower--if they think they wouldn't get enough sales to get rolling as quickly as they want, but I offhand I think they could ride the initial waves well, and then lower as necessary to push momentum further.)

I imagine they want to tier things somewhat, rather than stack everything at $100 (and then move the GBA down), so it seems like a varying grade of quality options. And unless they are planning on producing three portables simultaneously (which may still be a good thing--who knows?) they'll wait on GameBoy's direct successor to put GBA compatibility in any of the devices--as the DS would be the most logical (it would adopt the lowest price point and has the appropriate chip and screen size [if Nintendo is serious about chasing up the PSP, they'll have to shoot for a much different design] ) and putting the ability in from the start would make it and the GBA conflict too much. By that time, the DS's "different appeal" would have established itself well (if it does indeed catch on well), it can shift to the $100 price point if it hasn't already, and tossing in GBA compatibility would be easy, make sense, add attractiveness, and not conflict with its own uniqueness.
 
Actually, I would say that this time it's Nintendo who is adding unneded parts. The very basic concept of having two screens makes one wonder why was that even necessary? I think their new handheld could play games just fine without such a bizarre concept. However, they want such a concept because I'm suspecting this new device will play different kinds of games compared to GBA that plays traditional 'hardcore' games.

Also, on the PSP, all the 'extra' stuff, like the media processor and WiFi actually will get used in the games, for the sound/video playing purposes and wireless online gameplay.

Where does it say they can't ?
Nowhere, but they obviously won't. Time and again they have never answered to a more technically capable 'threat', by releasing the equally powered handheld device, and we can see that's repeating again.
 
Fox5 said:
Somehow, I knew that Perfect Dark would be on that list. But it is incredibly blurry and has tons of display artifacts, even in hi res.

Blurry? Display artefacts? What are you talking about?! PD had amongst the best IQ of any game on the N64, even using multitexturing in places.

Unfortunately the framerate sucked monkey-bum; I found the game pretty much impossible to play on the higher difficulty levels because with the almost non-existent autoaim I couldn't hit anything when the screen updated at less than 10fps. The difficulty level was clearly PD's biggest flaw, it's not that enemies got more health or aimed better or did more damage in higher difficulties, they did ALL of that, plus the player gets less ammo, no body armor and the autoaim circle gets smaller too. I got so pissed at that game because enemies have no reaction time. As soon as I duck out around a corner, they nail me one in the chest. They shoot *immediately*, which is terribly unrealistic.

PD could have been a great game, but the stupidly high difficulty, the idiotic over-use of lens flares (which annoys the player and makes the framerate dive down the toilet), Elvis the Alien and those silly badguy aliens that looked like... Well, I don't know what they looked like, something stupid I guess... These factors all worked together to prevent PD from being anything really great, which is why I don't lament Rare's defection over to MS. They deserve each other, hehehehe! :)

but I think Turok had a draw distance of only about a few feet.

Few feet? No way, though draw distance actually varied in different places of the game, it was easily 10-15 meters in most places and even more in some areas. Turok 2 had generally even longer draw distances, but that game chugged really bad, especially in hires.

It was also terribly buggy. For example, in my copy it wasn't possible to pick up tranquilizer ammo. :) If you found a tranq gun, you had 10 shots or something like that, and that was it.

I don't recall "crawling ants" as a problem in any game

Maybe because you didn't look? Most N64 games have this problem, look at distant surfaces, particulary textures with even, regular patterns. See how parts of the pattern wink in and out of existence as you move.

at least no more so than perfect dark.

There aren't much in the way of crawling ants in PD, since it uses mipmapping + trilinear. Scrolling text on monitor screens and decal textures on walls aren't mipmapped, but that's the sole exceptions in that game. Most other N64 games aren't mipmapping anything.

BTW, how come in goldeneye and perfect dark if you looked straight down the ground textures looked really wierd sometimes?

I never saw this happen, and I looked around quite a lot in those games, studying everything.

Anyhow, wasn't halflife a 200 MB game? And they could use compression of some sort, though most PC games already do.

Hm, PK3 files are just ordinary ZIP archives with a different extension. Not sure about Quake PAK files though; they might just be a lump of a file which contains all the other smaller files in one big container. Then again, maybe half-life didn't use the PAK format? I can't remember; too long ago! :)
 
Tagrineth said:
Fox5 said:
Well, anyhow, without high quality sound(probably snes or n64 quality, maybe dreamcast) and without voices and movies, many games could fit on nintendo's 128 MB carts. Wasn't Rogue Leader supposed to be only around 200 MB?
However, I could see sony trying to undercut nintendo's prices and selling the average PSP game for $20-$25.

Ikaruga for the Dreamcast is only 40MB... presumably the GC version is the same size.

I would believe that claim about Rogue Leader. If it's much bigger, they wouldn't have stuffed an enhanced version of it in with Rebel Strike, now would they!

I think Ikaruga might even be smaller than that.

heh, its like the portable version of the 32x

Eh? Other than both having most likely failing and having few good games(basically none on the 32x), oh and having dual chips, it isn't really the same at all as the 32x. Hardware wise I'd say probably closer to saturn, but still, the 32x was sold as an arcade addon to a system, this is sold as a dual screen portable.(dual gimmicks!) The dual screens is sort of like virtual boy, which also had dual screens, and probably used them to greater effect.

BTW, why can't nintendo just add a cartridge slot into whatever new system they make? GBA carts aren't that big, and cartridge slots are fairly cheap, at least in comparision to a disk drive.(though I wouldn't think it'd be different than adding an extra memory or ide slot on a motherboard)

Blurry? Display artefacts? What are you talking about?! PD had amongst the best IQ of any game on the N64, even using multitexturing in places.

Yes, it was blurry, at least on all the versions I've played, even in hi res. Super Mario 64, Conker, and Goldeneye all offered a clearer image. And Perfect Dark had a problem with textures/pixels disappearing/flickering.(I think conker's bad fur day had this, but to a lesser extent) I guess that's what crawling ants is, but I don't see how they're crawling at all.
 
The odd thing about N64's AA is that it's Line AA (Wu), and doesn't work on all edges... often if you stop and look around, you can see probably a quarter of the on-screen edges aren't AA'ed at all, while the rest are blended perfectly.
 
Tagrineth said:
The odd thing about N64's AA is that it's Line AA (Wu), and doesn't work on all edges... often if you stop and look around, you can see probably a quarter of the on-screen edges aren't AA'ed at all, while the rest are blended perfectly.

Isn't that the same with any edge AA solution?
 
Back
Top