PSP: Playable on show floor, impressions inside.
- Thread starter Paul
- Start date
If using the existing console chips for portables was so easy, why didn't Nintendo develop a portable GC to compete with PSP, instead of the underwhelming DS :?
They could've even include that 2nd screen, making the GC based DS much more attractive. By using existing technology, they could still possibly have sold it for less than PSP.
They could've even include that 2nd screen, making the GC based DS much more attractive. By using existing technology, they could still possibly have sold it for less than PSP.
jvd said:
Cough*they're HUGE*cough...
jvd said:
Oh u mean THOSE... Well, that would blatantly make PSP a PS2Portable....
I guess Sony wanted to have a decent price-performance ratio, and also add some features that are not available to PS2 (per-pixel lighting and a few others).... Also, i'm not sure how hot those 90nm chips are....
london-boy said:
right but thats not what i'm talking about .
I'm sure the 90nm ps2 chips would allow the psp to be sub 150$ easily .
I'm guessing it lacked the hardware to take advantage of umd ? but i would think they could do that in software ?
Bah who reallys knows with sony
All i know is the portable cube could be made for sub 100
Well maybe if the 90nm PS2 chip run at a higher temperature than it is possible to dissipate on PSP, that would be reason enough.
Still, they would have had to re-worked parts of the chip anyway to be able to fit it with different memory setus and such, so i guess they just went all the way and changed it completely.
Also, remember than up until not too long ago, PSP was supposed to just BE DIFFERENT. less eDRAM, less main ram... Only now it's getting closer and closer to PS2 specs...
And needless to say, PSP doesn't need all the fillrate the PS2 GS could provide (would be nice to see what they could do with it though, considering the resources saved from running games at such lower resolution), so that might be a reason too...
Still, they would have had to re-worked parts of the chip anyway to be able to fit it with different memory setus and such, so i guess they just went all the way and changed it completely.
Also, remember than up until not too long ago, PSP was supposed to just BE DIFFERENT. less eDRAM, less main ram... Only now it's getting closer and closer to PS2 specs...
And needless to say, PSP doesn't need all the fillrate the PS2 GS could provide (would be nice to see what they could do with it though, considering the resources saved from running games at such lower resolution), so that might be a reason too...
jvd said:
I still don't know why you think GC could be made portable for under $100, today at least. in 2 years time, sure, why not... But we don't even know how much manufaturing PSP costs, so i guess we'll never know how much a "GCP" would cost...
jvd said:
Have you considered, that
- Nintendo doesn't fab their own ships
- doesn't make their own chips
considering those two points, you have to see that Nintendo is dependant on others to decrease the size of the GameCube board and chips.
Then there are
- battery life requirements
- lcd
- disc drive (unless you want GameCube games running of Cartridges)
Sony is in charge of 90% of the above listed factors through their different devisions. Their consumer electronics devision has worked with portable players for years. They fab their own chips and since everything is basically custom (apart from the licensed technology's and core's). Obviously Sony has the ability to control everything in-house and therefore can also maximize performance/cost to a maximum right until the fabbing and their resources allow it. I know that Nintendo can achieve the same through other companies aswell, but with every company added, it costs money or lowers royality fees. Even if they had the support to actually make a GCN portable, I personally think there are way more factors to consider and that at the same time, the cost would be so low that Nintendo would make significantly less money (or loose more on HW sold) and therefore royality fees would go up.
This begs the question: Can Nintendo afford to compete on a technology level without loosing valuable profits they are making now? People like Deadmeat are already doubting Nintendo can sustain this in the console business - now that PSP has entered the handheld market, I am left wondering if Nintendo really has the resources to compete neck at neck.
Phil said:
Agreed. Not sure how ATI will take it if Nintendo goes up to them and say "Hey, we need you to redesign our 4 year old chips to make them smaller for our GBA2!".... At what price will ATI do that? Same for IBM or whoever made the Gekko. IBM wouldn't really be a problem, they seem to be willing to put their hands every freaking where (PS3, Xbox2, N5, Apple, EVERYTHING)
Does it really matter? Nintendo has in the portabl emarket a reputation, a brand recognition that not even Sony has in the console market. Nintendo MEANS Gameboy MEANS the only portable console worth having. It's been like that for the last, what, 15+ years...?
Whatever they do, million will run to buy what they produce, as long as they stick the "gameboy" name on it. Just like we all know millions of people will run to buy PS3 as soon as it comes out. It's the name, first, then after the hype goes down a bit, all they need to do is start pumping the good games and they're sorted.
london-boy said:
Of course it does. The discussion is on the assumption that a portable GC could be launched at a competitive price (JVD: $250). I brought up those factors because they are relevant if Nintendo wants to compete on the technology side. If they must or not to secure their market is an entire different discussion and most of that will have to be seen - though if the difference is as big as Nintendo DS to PSP, then I'm sure it will have a great impact on the casual consumer sooner or later.
DOesn't matter
Yup your point ?
Well how much power would the geko and filper draw running at the current speeds on 90nm tech ?
How much would they use with modifications for running in set up like this ?
Yes the lcd is a factor. Of course they don't need to put the same lcd as sony does .
They don't need to have umd , they don't need to have mp3 playback.
The only thing i can see as a problem is the disc drive.
Of course they can just use a cartridge based or another based distrubution .
After all many of u are willing to rebuy ps2 games on umd for your psp.
There will be those willing to buy gamecube games on a portable.
RIght and nintendo has been working in portable gaming devices for what now 12 years and has had succesfull products in that field . Basicly holding a monoply over it . Has sony been succesfull in this field yet ?
right but not only does sony need to pay for the fabs , the new tech in the psp , the tweaking and the people to tweak it . Where as nintendo would pay someone else to deal with all these problems .
RIght ibm , ati and whoever owns the ram. Which nintendo already has good relationships with and the companys have experiance with both of these chips and lay outs which sony doesn't have the privliage of with the psp.
Right the gamecube costs 100$ to sell to us. We don't know how much it costs them. But lets say a 100$ .
We do not know the size of the chips nor the process they are built on . The speeds of which they run at are now very low for this day. I'm sure on 90nm the yields will be high and they can run at very low voltage with out any powersaving tweaks done to them .
I don't see cost there going up from there .
You loose the disc drive most likely but are stuck with the other format . That will prob negate each other.
YOu can loose plugs , controllers the controller ports and other ports that wont be needed. and i would say all in all the only thing that can add significantly to the cost of the portable cube is the lcd screen .
How much can the lcd screen cost ? 15 ? 30 ?
So you have what a 115$ dollar system to 130$ system ?
IT could even be less.
The flipper and gekko may fit on the same die. Reducing costs through out the system .
THe redesigned flipper / gekko on one chip would also send savings to the gamecube devision .
I can easily see it being done .
Zapp$ter said:
Yes that was the point .
I view it as the last breath of the original gameboy. This will give those who have a large current gameboy library a last system with upgrade graphics . It will allow nintendo to launch n64 titles all the while letting sony release the psp while nintendo readys the gb2 .
I can see a gameboy with game cube graphics launching for double what the ds costs (both of them making a profit for nintendo) the gb 2 will be the high end game system to go against the psp and the ds will be there for younger kids mostly under 12 and those who want a good 2d fix .
After all i can see a psp llasting no more than 10 mins in my 9 year old cousins hands .
I, and I'm sure I speak for the majority of gamers, would not easily "rebuy" a game just that I can play it again on PSP.jvd said:
But I would buy a game, like GT4, if it was released around the same time as the home console version, and I would be able to transfer the cars and game data I've collected between PS2 and PSP.
...except I think I'll still buy GT4 for both PS2 and PSP, regardless of the data interchangeability.
Not sure if you listened to the E3 conference because that's exactly the point! They don't want to.Phil said:
Back to the PSP: IMO it's too sexy for its own good
Like that guy here said you are worried that it might be scratched etc. so like i already assumed earlier it might be too fragile.I just wanted to mention that Nintendo can get VERY good prices for technology that goes into their gaming machines because they sell millions of them. They buy parts in the millions. Having everything manufactured in-house doesn't automatically equal cheaper than outsourcing. Sometimes it's better/cheaper to outsource.
