PSP2 features - the handheld version *renamed

I prefer larger screen than having to settle for smaller 3D screen. If we look at the sales of DS XL, there are market for larger size portable gaming.

But yeah, if the 3DS takes off, Sony will be in far second place again.

From what I heard they kept the similar form factor as the current PSP. Not sure about UMD, probably not gonna be in PSP2, so there should be more room for battery and cooling. It'll be interesting never the less.

 

Does't matter if it's enough of a novelty for people to buy. If the only handheld with 3D photography, it'll garner enough attention from that alone to swing sales in its favour. Considering Sony's 3D push, they'd be insane not to incorporate 3D in PSP2 and integrate it into their Sony 3d environment of TVs, portable, and PS3, allowing 3D capture on PSP2 and playback on PS3 which recently got a 3D photo browser update. given the backside touchpad, they won't have the issues of 3D + touchscreen that make touch and 3D a supposedly non-ideal mix.

To me 3D on PSP2 seems an essential if Sony aren't going to miss out once again on the Big Thing. Which also to me means PSP2 won't feature a 3D screen!

If actually going the 3D route though, are there any mobile chips that are specifying any hardware 3D optimisation techniques, or is it all too early and left to developers to work out their own solutions? At least PSP2 should have programmability advantages to enable suitable cheats as needed, where DS would be stuck with full rendering both cameras as I understand it.

 

I understand what you are saying, but given that there is at least 6 months between 3DS and PSP2 launches (if there is any truth in the rumours), then if the 3DS "experience" is not a lasting one, or there are visual difficulties, or whatever issues the 3D might bring up,that realisation will be apparent just as the PSP2 is launching to the benefit of the PSP2 , and if there are no issues, then PSP2 without 3D is launching "old tech", to its detriment.

 

I also think it is pretty difficult to tell at this point whether or not the PSP2 will feature 3D to be honest. The touch screen on the back gives me the impression that it might, but otherwise no idea and it is anyone's guess. I'm not even sure what I'd want personally. I think I would like to have 3D on it personally, and if they can find a way to output 3D from the PS3 onto that as well that could be a nice bonus.

As using the original PSP for watching TV shows was really great (in fact, the PSP is still my device of choice for this purpose, and the fact that I can lock the controls without locking the screen so my son can watch something on it without accidentally cancelling it is a huge bonus - I miss this on the iPhone), I think I could definitely appreciate being able to see 3D movies and such on the PSP2.

The question is what the sacrifice would be - what if a non-3D screen would look waaaay better for 2D content and you could get an awesome high-res oled display or whatever instead? Would it be s worthwhile trade-off in favor of supporting 3D?

 

If 3DS is $250 as announced, what is the PSP2 pricing going to be?

Latest smart phones are $200 upfront. Of course, it comes with an expensive contract, at least in the US. But if people are going to pay for mobile service, then it's kind of a sunk cost anyways.

This year the competition in the tablet space will heat up and 7-inch tablets from mainstream manufacturers may trend downwards towards the expected PSP2 price band ($200-300).

Of course PSP2 will outperform any other mobile device at launch so a number of people may be willing to pay a premium (though probably a smaller number than the number who bought the PSP at launch, given all the smart phone competition).

But in a year or two after the PSP2 platform has been locked, other mobile devices may match or exceed PSP2 performance.

 

IMHO, for market success in 2011 -> 2018(?), mediocre 3D >> superb 2D.

We're probably talking about a market of ~95% 3D games and maybe some 5% 2D vectorized games here. Picture quality won't be as important as the auto-stereoscopic 3D gimmick.

Of course, a minimum standard must be met (too much ghosting could hamper the device's popularity, as it did with PSP-1000), but viewing angles and color reproduction shouldn't be decisive factors with a game-oriented device.

 

There can't be too many visual difficulties as we have other 3D screens out and about. Glasses based solutions don't go down well, but 3DS reviews are generally positive about the 3D experience. 3D may add nothing to the experience - I felt I preferred Pixar's Up! in 2D over 3D - but it'll be the chief selling point. How could you launch a new handheld without an outdated (even if perfectly functional) screen type, and keep that for 5 years as the world around you goes 3D? Too much of a gamble. If 3D sucks, it can be disabled on a 3D screen, but if you don't have a 3D screen, you can't add 3D support. Hedging one's bets, I'd stick in 3D, jumping on the bandwagon (a bandwagon Sony is producing itself!) and making sure I'd not get left behind.

 

That doesn't matter if the software library, something unique to handhelds, is strong enough. PS3 is still selling despite PC hardware eclipsing it because you can't get it's game experience on better hardware. DS is still selling despite being eclipsed by every other mobile device out there, but there's nowhere else to play Layton and DQ and Nintendogs. A new mobile phone 3 years of PSP2 could be faster, and could have a GT clone and a LBP clone and whatever, but it won't have those titles which is what gamers are looking for.

The hardware is most important at launch as it defines the future capabilities of the platform, but as the platform gets older it's the software that sustains it. This is different to mobiles where hardware is everything because the software is the same between devices and targeted, I presume, at lowest common denominators during development such that the latest, greatest mobile won't necessarily be able to outperform in software what a 2-3 year old handheld can do.

 

IMHO during 201x, 3D won't be an optional feature, it'll quickly become a standard feature (like wifi and touchscreens nowadays) for mid to high-end portable devices.

The PSP2 lacking a 3D will sever its ties to a feature that will most likely define the decade, or at least the next 5 years.

 

We've yet to have one consumer device that has not only proven that the technology works and that there's a consumer demand for it. To call 3D the feature that will define the next 5-10 years is some serious crystal ball gazing at this point.

There are way too many unanswered questions, especially regarding long-term effects on the human visual system, to call it yet, at least IMHO.

 

Perhaps you could say that Sony has hedged their bets here? If they have truly gone for say no 3D screen but with a backside touch panel then they can obviously add that feature in a couple of years as a replacement once the process technology matures once again to increase the performance if they feel it is needed. If anything was proved by Apple it's that hardware can change quite rapidly over a fixed time period. Even if they launch now with a PSP2 - 2D, they can still come out with a PSP2 - 3D model and transition to that whilst they continue to sell the PSP2 at a lower price.

What process do you think they will launch the PSP2 on? If they are launching at the cutting edge of 28nm then I don't think they'll have much luck. However if they are launching on 40nm then they could take advantage of the die shrink to either 28 or 22nm in order to split off a 3D model or completely replace the PSP2 with a PSP2 with a 3D screen. It isn't like developers will stop supporting 2D if 3D becomes available on all handhelds because theres a sizeable market of people who will not or cannot use it.

 

By then, PSP2's userbase will be pretty defined. They need a successful product with successful launch. DS showed a fancy touch-interface was the thing to have. Wii showed huge interest with its novel interface. Kinect is making a big noise and generating copycats. Touchscreens on phones have become ubiqitous. 3D may be a useless gimmick in real terms, but in terms of capturing user interest I think a conventional handheld game device won't garner the attention next to a 3D one. In a game retailer, 3DS and PSP2 side-by-side, the one that's 3D would surely be the one getting the views? Although maybe not if it's broken from any but a limited viewing angle - people just won't notice it. But still, a stand-out feature is going to help one platform over the other, and I don't think back-faced touch-pad is going to captivate public interest in the same way 3D screen will.

Now if 3D turns out to be an unwanted gimmick once people have experienced it, PSP2 could launch without. But that's a gamble, whereas adding a 3D screen wouldn't be. Sony could, bizarrely, test the waters by including a 3D screen and not announcing it. See how sales go. If they are okay, switch to a 2D screen and save the cost. If PSP2 lacks interest, enable the 3D. That'd be a highly unconventional strategy, but at least safer in the long run than betting 3D will remain niche.

Depends when they launch! Could be this winter, could be next spring or summer. And depends on the chips. Once we know specs can hazard a guess at production node.

 

Hasn't Apple shown us that continuous improvement of the same product can yield vast improvements in sales and market penetration? The old stodgy console mindset needs to be dropped in an age where CE devices can do complete 180 degree turns. No longer are products hemmed in by their launch success or lack thereof. Even Microsoft managed to increase demand YOY pretty much every year since they released their console to relatively slow sales.

Stand out features do help, but that doesn't mean that a product which doesn't stand out as much cannot be successful. The Xbox 360 didn't really have much of a standout 'mass market' feature when it launched as multiplayer on consoles was still fairly niche. Even by old standards without a big name and without a gimmick if the product itself is good and it satisfies the market demands for it theres no reason why Sony cannot make an acceptable run of it even if theres another product out there which grabs all of the mainstream attention. They still have an opportunity, if 1-2 years down the track to really 'Kinect' with a new audience if you know what I mean?

I doesn't really make sense to launch with expensive features turned off and the development cost/NRE expenditure that entails without actually trying to make use of it. I don't think there are 3D screens available in a larger form factor in the numbers Sony would actually want, they would therefore have to make an investment to make the screens available for the PSP2. That would have been like developing the Cell but launching with just one PPE exposed on the PS3 to see if the extra performance would be worthwhile.

Well the funny thing is, announcing the product now but with an unknown release date could indicate that Sony have sourced a 3D screen and are working to release with one. Why else would they announce the details of their product just before the release of the 3DS if not to say to people 'wait for us, we have a better product'? I doubt it would actually make sense to just come out with 'we have PS3 graphics on a handheld' unless they truly haven't learnt anything from this generation.

 

That's possibly true, but it means the end to closed-platform, hardware-hitting development and a software layer interface. That's not really condusive to the AAA portable titles that a portable PS would naturally be aiming at. iOs hasn't delivered PSP challenging titles for a long time. If PSP2 goes that route, games performance will either be capped to the lower performing version; scale accordingly giving the developers more headaches than a fixed hardware platform (though if the software interface is okay, maybe not too many); or have to leave out earlier generations of handheld. You also tie future revisions to a hardware platform for BC, limiting options. Whatever PSP2's design now, Sony will be stuck with it if each generation of PSP is expected to run prior software, whereas a clean-break design as has been the case before gives a new start and chance at better efficiencies etc. Again, a decent software middleware could essentially hide all that, but the cost is hardware use, and perhaps the best card in PSP2's hand at the moment is its opportunity to offer the most ever performance in a handheld and the best use of that hardware so it's still competitive years down the line while dirt cheap to mass produce.

Different market. 360 was a clean-break generation, without any direct competition at launch. PSP2 is launching into a crowded, dynamic market that's got rivals on every side and they'll be facing fierce competition for the next few years, until maybe the market has stabilised and whittled down to a few standards.

Kinect is a peripheral. If 3D could be retrofitted as a peripheral to PSP2, I'd agree!

It certainly doesn't make much sense, I agree.

Not really. With more processing we know there are advantages. With 3D, we don't know how important that'll be. We're right on the threshold of either its mass adoption or its relegation to historical gimmick. Nintendo have gone all-in, with 3D being the only real differentiator for a platform that otherwise can't offer much more than a mobile phone beyond software (which in Nintendo's case is probably enough given DS mindshare). If Nintendo didn't have 3D, they'd have nothing much new to offer. As it is, they can offer 3D games, 3D photos and 3D contentas the intial bait, plus possible brillinat AR, all new experiences that people will buy into even if just as early tastes. Into that market, what can Sony offer? The less features they have compared to the competition, the harder to pedal their wares. Buy a famous Apple that offers touchscreen and a trillion apps and content and games; or famous 3DS that offers touchscreen and games and 3D photography and content, or a ubbiquitous Android phone that offers a touchscreen and a billion apps and every imaginable feature and is also your phone; or a PSP that has a touchpad and some games and content but better graphics than the rest.

I don't think better graphics carries enough weight any more. I think it's features and experiences people want the most, hence my view of a tablet form for next-gen consoles being a good idea. If the experiences are fewer than the competition, even if in higher quality in what they do (best quality, console-quality games on a handheld), I don't think consumer interest will be there.

That indeed makes sense.

Sony are often very slow learners, and I wouldn't put it past them!

 

It really depends on the performance level of the lower tier and what the difference actually entails. With the PSP2 they have to deal with Rock, I.E. 3DS and Paper I.E. IOS. If they focus on the 3DS then the PSP2 is completely uncompetitive against IOS and if they focus on IOS then they are completely uncompetitive against the 3DS. So why not produce two versions of the PSP2, one with higher performance and 3D screen and another version which has lower performance and a 2D screen with effective performance in their stated game modes being identical? At a later time they could choose to combine the two lines if 3D becomes popular or keep them separate if 3D proves to be niche even if that niche is large by comparison. They could either start with just the 2D version or offer them both simultaniously.

Then how about Gameboy -> Gameboy colour transition, only this time it is PSP2 2D to PSP2 3D?

Well they are the only handheld maker to seriously offer a TV out, hence the tablet connection you're always trying to push. At the same time they are the only ones with a full console user interface and the performance. Maybe given their performance they could really push the multimedia aspect and include the kind of camera you'd actually want to take photos with? Finally since they call themselves Sony 'computer' entertainment, it wouldn't be surprising if the PSP2 was infact a tablet computer at the same time. They could only really push a high end version if they were also pushing a lower end version which cut down on all these features and focused on the basics. So we go back to the idea of a cut down PSP2 and a fully featured version.

Everything I heard about that was that smell-o-vision made people feel sick.

 

Was LBP or even GT Mobile big sellers? Seems by the time they released for the PSP, the platform was pretty long in the tooth.

I'm sure GOW sold well and so would Uncharted for the PSP2. However, those graphically rich experiences would be far better on a big screen than whatever screen Sony manages to use -- even if they had something like a 15-inch roll-up OLED display that is very transportable.

Would you rather that the GOW and Uncharted teams work on a PSP2 game, possibly delaying the next installments of those franchises, or concentrate and get to work on the next console game?

Especially when those games would release to a market where console-like portable gaming may not result in a lot of sales. It is going to be much tougher for Sony to convince people to tote a dedicated portable gaming device which is not a Nintendo than it was when the PSP launched.

 

If you are talking about the iphone, then perhaps the sucess of that policy is only because the userbase is accustomed to changing the device every 18-24 months anyway, and Apple's trick has been to catch that cycle with a new product, so as its users don't move away.

Its never been the same with a portable console, people don't EXPECT to get rid of it and get a new one 18 months later, do they ? I wonder what the cycle time is on itouches ?

 

Why must PSP2 obviously be this?

 

How many times have people rebought a DS for a DS lite or DSi or DSi XL or the various PSP revisions? Handhelds get broken, they lose their ability to hold a charge or a new one comes out with far better features all the time in the handheld market.

 

And don't forget the large incentives to upgrade every time you are eligible in many markets.