PSP Launching Price : Japan 48,000 Yen, UK : ~250 Pounds

[Fafalada]

A portable system will not sell for 300 dollars. Look at NGage - my local Target had a shipment come in around October and last time I went there about 2 of the original six were gone. On the other hand they go through GBASP shipments every week. It's going to be hard to justify a price three times higher than the competitor, regardless of is abilities.

Price doesn't mean it couldn't still sell Well though. PPCs are typically even more expensive, and they tend to sell quite well (the popular models at least), and now with the integrated phone models they offer everything NGage has, but with much more hightech gadget appeal Nokia's device has (IMO).

Don't extrapolate from your own experiences onto others. For my preferences PS2 has a much better selection of titles.

I think selection is quite objective to quantify though. PS2 covers a wider range of genres then other consoles, thanks to sheer size of the library.
And that automatically means it applies to more different tastes, no matter how subjective each of them is

 

[cybamerc]

marconelly!:

> Don't tell me you don't have all the Supermarios, Yoshis, and
> whatnot, that you've probably played to death on SNES, on your GBA?

The only game I own multiple copies of is Rayman for Saturn and PS1... and that is only because I was forced to buy it with the early import units.

> Sure enough, you now have the GBA player

No I don't.

> Why do you want the game on the GBA

I don't particularly want anything on GBA but there's a market for certain types of games on that system and that's the way it is.




Almasy:

> and yet, you say you won´t stop playing handhelds when the 3D
> portable from Nintendo comes.

I haven't said that. You need to read more closely and stop putting words in my mouth.

> Ok, so I suppose you play your GBA for 8 straight hours or whatever
> it´s battery life is?

I have as a matter of fact. Advance Wars is one awesome game I tell ya. Oh and, the battery life is 15 hours according to Nintendo (probably more IRL).

> Also, why are you even in this board if you don´t care about new technology

Because no purchase is required to talk about it. And although I'm interested in new technology I'm not necessarilly supportive of it.

> So, getting less hardware actually benefits you?

That's a silly statement. I get what I pay for. Something more powerful would cost me more money (see PSP).

> and yet you are more concerned about Nintendo earning a profit.

I'm certainly interested in seeing them do well. Getting something cheap may benifit me now but if it means Nintendo going bankrupt in the long run I'd say it isn't worth it.

> Sony changed that, and I was hoping that could happen again

They can't because the GBA is already as succesful as you can reasonably expect a handheld system to be. And Sony isn't anywhere near the publisher that Nintendo is which means it has to make its money on roalties (which incidentally is a lot less than what you make on your own software).

> don´t you even think about a next gen Zelda with N5´s graphics?

No.

> what even gives you the remote idea that Nintendo is more willing
> to support 2D, when on N64 and GCN there´s almost zero 2D games
> on them

Because it's in their blood. The reason you don't see a lot of 2d stuff on N64 and GameCube is because they have Game Boy for that.

 

[Ty]

Kyo series cannot really be deemed failures since they Never tried to capture anything even remotely close to high end. Strictly midrange with adequate performence cards.

So it had to capture the high end to be a market success? Anyway you look at it, it wasn't successful enough for STM to push SE out in a timely manner nor create Series 4 products even though the work was largely done. That means it was a failure imo.

If there is one thing nobody would blame for the failure of Dreamcast it would be its graphics hardware.

I never said it failed strictly because of the hardware though. If you want to believe that then I won't stop you.

Kyro 1 and II didn't fail. Kyro became a popular and well recognised budget graphics solution which sold well (millions of chips sold) and made profit for both IMGTEC and STM. STM's financial problems elsewhere, and there desire for a quick cach injection, were not the fault of Kyro 1 or II.

So it sold well enough that STM decide to hang onto the SE till it was basically obsolete by the time they released it AND then they canned production of Series 4 even though Kyro I and II made money? So essentially you're saying, Kyro I and II made STM money but because they were cash strapped they decided to cancel production for a chip that was already complete - which could have made them money. The logic then follows that STM felt that Series 4 was NOT going to make back enough money to be worthwhile. Hence it's deemed a market failure (well technically it never got released into the market so it was just a failure).

In the end, several licensees gave up on the technology (not just Sony) which is what my initial reply dealt with.

 

[function]

Naomi 2 was a Sega specific hardware solution, based on previous hardware that had been designed to be cost effective for a fairly cheap console to be released back in 1998. The CPU and GPU's were the same type and speed as those in the Dreamcast. Elan (the T&L unit) was the only new peice of technology.

On the other hand, there were two power VRs on it plus the Elan chip, plus tons of RAM. That doesn't exactly ring 'cheap' to me. Naomi 2 was designed for the arcades, where the cost of the hardware is not an issue.

Far from being not an issue, I think the whole idea of Naomi 2 was to allow Sega to have a cutting edge arcade board while having low R+D costs (Elan, pretty much) and low manufacturing costs (by using parts that were being mass produced for the DC). The system does use a lot of memory, but by the time Naomi 2 was being made 100mhz SDRAM was cheap enough to bung loads on.

But cheap for an arcade board doesn't necesserily mean cost effective for a state of the art console - I don't think Naomi 2 would have been a suitable solution for a home console.

If IT had been designing a chipset to go in a console in 2000, for the kind of budget the PS2 had, I think it's reasonable to expect that it would have significantly outperformed Naomi 2 on the GPU end. Maybe even T&L - Elan was a 100mhz part (to sync with the 100mhz memory I believe) after all.

Maybe, maybe not... Maybe we would just get souped-up Dreamcast, which would again be better than PS2 in some things and worse in others. It's all up to speculation really at this point, really...

Yep, it is indeed all speculation. And unlike DM, I don't necesserily think going with a PVR solution (or none Sony solution) would have been better for the PS2. I just think it might have been [edit: as in "hey, maybe ..."] - which is where the "fun speculation" comes in.

In house versus shopping for the best 3rd party solutions are just different approaches to the same goal - to make the most money you can by having the right system at the right time for the right price. I don't see that one approach is inherently better than the other. It'll be fun seeing who comes out on top next generation between MS and Sony, though I'm sure whatever the final outcome both will have produced excellent systems.

 

[notAFanB]

So it had to capture the high end to be a market success? Anyway you look at it, it wasn't successful enough for STM to push SE out in a timely manner nor create Series 4 products even though the work was largely done. That means it was a failure imo.

nope, conquering the world is not required. it acheived what it set out ot do, an affordable altenative to the mid-range at the time.

 

[Ty]

So it had to capture the high end to be a market success? Anyway you look at it, it wasn't successful enough for STM to push SE out in a timely manner nor create Series 4 products even though the work was largely done. That means it was a failure imo.

nope, conquering the world is not required. it acheived what it set out ot do, an affordable altenative to the mid-range at the time.

Wait a minute. YOU said, "Kyo series cannot really be deemed failures since they Never tried to capture anything even remotely close to high end." Therefore you are implying that highend = success, not I.

Anyhow the fact remains, the Kyro I, II, and SE are lumped together with the Dinosaur, the Dodo, and 3Dfx, footnotes in history. I call that failure.

 

[Deadmeat]

..

Console prices, US vs UK

PSX2 : $179.99 vs L124.99
PSP : $359.99 vs ~L250

 

[marconelly!]

jvd, is your short term memory fused, or is this just a misunderstanding?

Also as of now there is no reason to have both. Where a gba helps alot with a gc in certian games .

[/quote]

 

[notAFanB]

Wait a minute. YOU said, "Kyo series cannot really be deemed failures since they Never tried to capture anything even remotely close to high end." Therefore you are implying that highend = success, not I.

alrght let me clarify, the Kyro series never aimed for high end rego not making high end penetration has no bearing on whether it met it's targets.

nowhere in my intent was ot imply that product is successful iff massive market penetration.

so my implication is not highend==success rather meetTarget=true-->success

 

[cthellis42]

Launch prices, DM, launch prices. It doesn't parallel well to take current prices after years of being on the market and close competition with rivals.

 

[Ty]

alrght let me clarify, the Kyro series never aimed for high end rego not making high end penetration has no bearing on whether it met it's targets.

Well first of all I think that's a little unclear historically speaking. In other words, what proof from them do you have that says, "We are targeting mid-range performance"?. I think they aimed for it but just couldn't push it out the door and thus fell behind what they were initially shooting for. That said, it was still a very competent chip for the time.

I agree that 'high end penetration' doesn't define "market success" But it doesn't matter to the discussion at hand (my initial reply) because the Kyro I and II and II SE were marketplace failures. That's all, no more, no less.

nowhere in my intent was ot imply that product is successful iff massive market penetration.

so my implication is not highend==success rather meetTarget=true-->success

Good because it certainly wasn't mine.

 

[notAFanB]

I think they aimed for it but just couldn't push it out the door and thus fell behind what they were initially shooting for.

I am not aware of them pushing the envolpe as far as chasing DX specs+performence are concerned. Sure you can argue that they intended to aim for the top, but with no concrete plans shwoing up at the time, e can safely omitt it.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Re: ..

Console prices, US vs UK

PSX2 : $179.99 vs L124.99
PSP : $359.99 vs ~L250

Console prices EU

GCN ~99 euros
GBA-SP ~140 euros
PS2 ~180 euros
xbox ~190 euros (bundle)
PSP estimate ~249 euros (launch price)

 

[akira888]

Re: ..

GCN ~99 euros
GBA-SP ~140 euros

Ouch. Here GBA-SP is about 85 Euros (US$99.99) - same as NGC.

And on Kyro:
What matters is that PVR built an ASIC that was more silicon-efficent than any other GPU released at that time. To blame them for STM's piss-poor marketing and distribution of Series 3 is somewhat unfair. Look at this latest console round - which console by far has the best overall IQ/silicon area cost ratio? The Series 2 equipped Dreamcast.

 

[London Geezer]

The UK has historically been shafted with regards to prices. Always been like that, and getting worse. With the downfall of the dollar, UK£299 are now US$552.04 (today's exchange rate).

on 26 Oct 2000 (is that when ps2 launched?) it was equal to US$428.38. Quite a difference.

Point remains, UK games will pay UK£299 which will be almost DOUBLE what you guys pay in the US (US$299).

Sucks hey...

 

[hey69]

time that UK joins the freakin EU I would say! 8)

 

[London Geezer]

time that UK joins the freakin EU I would say! 8)

Because you think it would change something?
One of the reasons why the UK won't join is that fact i just explained. The country could go bankrupt without the overpricing (on EVERYTHING) it has been "spolied" with for decades now.
It's one of the great issues of the last years, and probably won't be resolved in quite a while. All i know is that we WILL eventually join the Europe, for better or for worse.

 

[Teasy]

Ty

I don't agree with what your saying and frankly some of your replies are confusing me. For instance I never said Series 4 was a success. So I don't know why your bringing it up in reply to me saying Kyro 1 and II were successes.

But anyway I'm not going to take this thread further off topic by posting the big reply I had written Instead I'm taking this discussion to PM's.

 

[Teasy]

The UK has historically been shafted with regards to prices. Always been like that, and getting worse. With the downfall of the dollar, UK£299 are now US$552.04 (today's exchange rate).

I wouldn't say its getting worse. GC released at a lower price then its U.S price and that was including VAT. When GC dropped to $99 in the U.S we didn't get it at £99 here, we got £79. Which at the time of pricing was around $99 + VAT. This is the first time I've noticed this, a console being priced around the same here as in the U,S. All my past consoles cost me far more then they'd have cost in the U.S. So that seems like a big change for the better.

Although I suppose ATM it looks worse since the Dollar has fallen dramatically against the Pound. Speaking of that, that's only a bad thing if a company does the old 1 Dollar = 1 Pound crap when pricing their product. Not all companies are doing this and if a company is honest with its pricing then the Dollar's poor showing makes things better for us. I mean last year a $299 product in the U.S would have meant a £225 product in the U.K when converting correctly and adding VAT. Now it would mean a £189 console (including VAT).

Personally I've been very happy with the dollar's collapse against the pound. My Newsgroup service, which is from the U.S, was £6.50 when I signed up a little while ago. Now I'm only getting charged £5.40 I just bought a Hitachi DeskStar 180GB 7200RPM 8MB cache HDD from a ebay user in the U.S and only paid £70 including delivery! The same product in the exact same auction from the U.S would have cost me £86 last year. I'm making great savings from the Dollar's crash

On joining the Euro.. no thanks. I can honestly say I'd absolutely hate it if we joined the Euro.

 

[London Geezer]

The UK has historically been shafted with regards to prices. Always been like that, and getting worse. With the downfall of the dollar, UK£299 are now US$552.04 (today's exchange rate).

I wouldn't say its getting worse. GC released at a lower price then its U.S price and that was including VAT. When GC dropped to $99 in the U.S we didn't get it at £99 here, we got £79. Which at the time of pricing was around $99 + VAT. Personally I have never seen this before, a console being priced around the same here as in the U,S. All my past consoles cost me far more then they'd have cost in the U.S. So that seems like a big change for the better.

Although I suppose ATM it looks worse since the Dollar has fallen dramatically against the Pound. Speaking of that, that's only a bad thing if a company does the old 1 Dollar = 1 Pound crap when pricing their product. Not all companies are doing this and if a company is honest with its pricing then the Dollar's poor showing makes things better for us. I mean last year $299 for a console in the U.S would have meant a £225 console in the U.K when converting correctly and adding VAT. Now it would mean a £189 console (including VAT).

Personally I've been very happy with the dollar's collapse against the pound. My Newsgroup service, which is from the U.S, was £6.50 when I signed up a little while ago. Now I'm only getting charged £5.40 I just bought a Hitachi DeskStar 180GB 7200RPM 8MB cache HDD from a U.S ebay user in the U.S and only paid £70 including delivery! The same product in the exact same auction from the U.S would have cost me £86 last year. I'm making great savings from the Dollar's crash

On joining the Euro.. no thanks. I can honestly say I'd absolutely hate it if we joined the Euro.

Yeah, as i said before the London offices of my company has made a relatively big profit out of the dollar's crash. However for other HQs around the world it's a very different story. Philadelphia are screaming WTF, for example.
The Euro would make a very big impact on the UK, personally i think it would a very very bad impact. This country has been surviving (and is in a very good shape) mainly because of the luxury of being able to have MUCH higher prices than other countries without too many people screaming about it, or do anything about it anyway. With the Euro things will change, and while for consumers it might be good (lower prices on goods), the financial aspect of the country would suffer greatly - crash in house prices, it would be the Tatcher's years all over again, and we seriously do not need that happening - My ex used to own 2 restaurants, villa in southern France and a flat in central London, and because of the Lady he went bankrupt overnight, lost everything. He's still paying off his debts (Not like i care really )