Rumor of a PSP phone

[Npl]

PSP isn't dual core, and they'd only need to emulate it for Digital download games, not UMD games, since it's not going to have UMD. They can probably recompile hits from the umd library and offer it digitally.

And you realize that downloadable games are practically the same disc-images? Or are you talking about PSP-Minis?
As soon as you start with recompiling, thats a tad different than emulating. It might be viable for future games, but why not just recompile the thing to the android-plattform then.

A dual core Ghz class ARM + a good gpu should be plenty to emulate the PSP.

Dont think so, PSX2 is still beeing bottlenecked by (PS2-)CPU-emulation on my 2,5 GHz Athlon 64 X2. Sure PS2 CPU is harder to emulate than the one (two as the Media-Engine is another 333MHz MIPS CPU without Vector-Unit but otherwise identical) in the PSP but not enough that I`d think it would be emulated comfortably on a 1,5GHz ARM.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

A dual core Ghz class ARM + a good gpu should be plenty to emulate the PSP.

It's not that easy. A 7 core, 3.2GHz CPU and 500 MHz large GPU ought to be enough to emulate PS2, but it isn't, because of the difference in architecture. Unless by emulate you mean 'be comparable with rewritten titles' as opposed to bytewise execution of PSP binaries.

 

[Carl B]

I still feel that a gaming phone would have a hard time in the US market - a phone like this is going to be too high-end for the average parent to buy their child, and I think for a more professional set there would be a semi-negative stigma associated with having a phone with dedicated gaming functionality.

Who knows. But, it's a perceptual hill to climb IMO.

In Europe I think it would have its best chance, and potentially Japan as their trending towards smartphones increases.

 

[patsu]

It's the 3G (anywhere) datalink that I want for PSP. A 3G iPad-like PSP is fine too.

Adhoc Party for PSP is ok but requires WiFi access point.

 

[RobertR1]

I still feel that a gaming phone would have a hard time in the US market - a phone like this is going to be too high-end for the average parent to buy their child, and I think for a more professional set there would be a semi-negative stigma associated with having a phone with dedicated gaming functionality.

Who knows. But, it's a perceptual hill to climb IMO.

In Europe I think it would have its best chance, and potentially Japan as their trending towards smartphones increases.

Plenty of iphones clearly sell in the US. Ofcourse it needs to have more appeal than gaming but gaming on the iphone is quite popular. It could serve a strong selling point. Frankly, it'd be a better idea than a conventional PSP2 in the US.

 

[Carl B]

Plenty of iphones clearly sell in the US. Ofcourse it needs to have more appeal than gaming but gaming on the iphone is quite popular. It could serve a strong selling point. Frankly, it'd be a better idea than a conventional PSP2 in the US.

The thing with the iPhone, is that it is "attractive" in its own right; by that I mean, if you own an iPhone, you are 'cool.' This applies equally to a 50-yr old male corporate exec as it does a 10-yr old girl. The gaming is awesome, yes, but it is not the brand, even if it helps sell the device or becomes part of the mix. And wouldn't a lot of these folk find the phone less appealing if it had dedicated gaming buttons? Steve Jobs himself is famously contemptuous of gaming, even if I think recently he's been forced to recognize the money potential.

This phone, regardless of any of its other features, will be a "gaming" phone. Even if 90% of apps run on the iPhone are games, it is different perceptually. And I am a doubter as to stateside success. Again, I think Europe might be more receptive though, so I'm not writing off the effort entirely. I could just outright be wrong also, but I'm happy to throw my hat in the predictions ring.

(For the record, I do not, and will not own an iPhone)

 

[specwarGP2]

I still feel that a gaming phone would have a hard time in the US market - a phone like this is going to be too high-end for the average parent to buy their child, and I think for a more professional set there would be a semi-negative stigma associated with having a phone with dedicated gaming functionality.

Who knows. But, it's a perceptual hill to climb IMO.

In Europe I think it would have its best chance, and potentially Japan as their trending towards smartphones increases.

I disagree. Apple has used gaming as a big advertising point for iphone. WP7 is using xbox integration as a big selling point.

PSPhone could be a big hit if Sony executes properly

 

[dobwal]

I think Sony should dropped the current PSP 4 button layout and drop in a second D pad labelled with the traditional square, circle, triangle and "x". That way you could have dual controls for FPSes or third person games that typical of whats found in console games.

 

[RudeCurve]

Despite not having dedicated gaming controls, games on iPhones are very popular because:

1. They're cheap most are only a couple dollars.
2. The games are simple yet FUN designed for short gaming sessions
3. They don't take up lots of storage space so you don't have to swap in/out games

As for a PSP phone I'm not really seeing the attraction/marketablility of "hardcore" games on a phone using dedicated gaming buttons because:

1. The games will likely be much more expensive
2. People who game on phones don't spend hours playing games
3. The games will likely use a lot more storage space

So I'm not seeing why someone would buy an expensive highend "hardcore gaming phone" just to play $2 mini-games...

 

[dobwal]

The thing with the iPhone, is that it is "attractive" in its own right; by that I mean, if you own an iPhone, you are 'cool.' This applies equally to a 50-yr old male corporate exec as it does a 10-yr old girl. The gaming is awesome, yes, but it is not the brand, even if it helps sell the device or becomes part of the mix. And wouldn't a lot of these folk find the phone less appealing if it had dedicated gaming buttons? Steve Jobs himself is famously contemptuous of gaming, even if I think recently he's been forced to recognize the money potential.

This phone, regardless of any of its other features, will be a "gaming" phone. Even if 90% of apps run on the iPhone are games, it is different perceptually. And I am a doubter as to stateside success. Again, I think Europe might be more receptive though, so I'm not writing off the effort entirely. I could just outright be wrong also, but I'm happy to throw my hat in the predictions ring.

(For the record, I do not, and will not own an iPhone)

As an owner of the Captivate who dropped the Iphone, the one thing I really miss is the game library on the Iphone. The Android market place for games is under developed and seem down right barren in comparison.

I dropped and broke my iphone but Im planning on repairing it and using it like a ipod touch to fulfill my portable gaming needs. It looks if I want to have the best of both worlds, Im going to have to carry two handsets.

 

[Rangers]

I still feel that a gaming phone would have a hard time in the US market - a phone like this is going to be too high-end for the average parent to buy their child, and I think for a more professional set there would be a semi-negative stigma associated with having a phone with dedicated gaming functionality.

Who knows. But, it's a perceptual hill to climb IMO.

In Europe I think it would have its best chance, and potentially Japan as their trending towards smartphones increases.

I disagree. Instantly something about this is really really promising to me.

Touchscreen gaming is fairly useless.

I'm not interested in a dedicated handheld gaming unit either (although I'm a bit interested in 3DS because of the 3D novelty_.

But you know what? Put legitimate gaming controls on my phone and suddenly I'm very interested. Imagine a SF4 port on this just for an example...

How about all the tons of emulators that run on Droid, but in my mind are fairly useless because of the touchscreen? Instantly with dedicated controls those become worthwhile. And that's just one aspect.

 

[RudeCurve]

Touchscreen gaming is fairly useless..

Useless to you.

There are shitloads of touch games on iPhone and DS that play GREAT and are very popular to boot.

 

[specwarGP2]

Despite not having dedicated gaming controls, games on iPhones are very popular because:

1. They're cheap most are only a couple dollars.
2. The games are simple yet FUN designed for short gaming sessions
3. They don't take up lots of storage space so you don't have to swap in/out games

1. Because they're only worth a couple of dollars. GT PSP is certainly worth $20.00
2. No reason why games like that cant exist on PSP.
3. People swap music in/out using itunes all the time. what's the difference?

As for a PSP phone I'm not really seeing the attraction/marketablility of "hardcore" games on a phone using dedicated gaming buttons because:

1. The games will likely be much more expensive
2. People who game on phones don't spend hours playing games
3. The games will likely use a lot more storage space

1. Full scale games should be more expensive.
2. Well according to you thats because games are designed for short gaming sessions.
3. 16 GB min will be standard and can use SD cards like all android phones.

So I'm not seeing why someone would buy an expensive highend "hardcore gaming phone" just to play $2 mini-games...

You just said that the games would be bigger and cost more, which sounds like they're not $2 mini games. But if you want cheap mini games, they exist for PSP too.

Lets be real here, the vast majority of games using touchscreen and accelerometer controls only would be a lot better if they used actual buttons.

 

[Carl B]

I disagree. Apple has used gaming as a big advertising point for iphone. WP7 is using xbox integration as a big selling point.

PSPhone could be a big hit if Sony executes properly

Apple does use gaming in its ads fairly extensively, but the question is how would the iPhone sell if it didn't have *any* games? My contention is that it would still sell well. As for WP7 and Xbox integration, that at most is a point of allure to XBox Live subscribers, but completely untested in the larger scheme of things; WP7 is no guaranteed success IMO. And I'm still rocking 6.1, so it's not anti Windows Mobile sentiment here, just a realization that MS' own phone/mobile gaming efforts are no less in the woods.

 

[RudeCurve]

1. Because they're only worth a couple of dollars.

And that's exactly why they easily sell on a phone. Most people who have iPhones aren't going to shell out $20 for "hardcore" games. Look at the top selling games on iPhone, they're only a couple dollars...coincedence? I think not.

GT PSP is certainly worth $20.00

To people who bought a PSP, not to people who bought a phone.

2. No reason why games like that cant exist on PSP.

Didn't say they couldn't exist, but why would you buy a Ferrari to drive to the grocery store?

3. People swap music in/out using itunes all the time. what's the difference?

The difference is each track takes up very little space therefore you can have several hundred songs on the device without needing to swap them in/out to make space. How much space does GT PSP use up?

1. Full scale games should be more expensive.

Duh, question is how are you going to sell them on a phone? Who's going to buy them? As I said most popular games on iPhone are a couple dollars. Is that a coincidence? I think not.

2. Well according to you thats because games are designed for short gaming sessions.

Games designed for a Phone are designed for short gaming sessions, because normal people like to be able to use the phone for...gasp....making and receiving phone calls, internet, other non-gaming stuff.

3. 16 GB min will be standard and can use SD cards like all android phones.

That's fine and dandy but the question is how's the battery life AFTER "several hours of hardcore gaming sessions"?

You just said that the games would be bigger and cost more, which sounds like they're not $2 mini games. But if you want cheap mini games, they exist for PSP too.

Um yeah...but why would you buy an expensive dedicated gaming phone to play $2 mini-games??? That's like spending $600 on a launch PS3 to play PS1 games.

Lets be real here, the vast majority of games using touchscreen and accelerometer controls only would be a lot better if they used actual buttons.

Actually they wouldn't if the game were specifically designed to use the touchscreen.

As someone mentioned earlier, a kid isn't going to spend $200+2yr contract + SD cards so they can play games on a phone "with dedicated gaming controls". They will do what a normal kid would do and spend $200 to get a DS or whatever.

Go ahead and wish for your PSP phone with dedicated gaming controls and $20 1GB games....just be prepared to watch it flop. The only way I could see the PSP Phone catching on is if there is a non-phone version of the same gaming hardware sold along side it.

 

[specwarGP2]

Um yeah...but why would you buy an expensive dedicated gaming phone to play $2 mini-games??? That's like spending $600 on a launch PS3 to play PS1 games.

$200 is expensive? Most android phones can be bought for less than that, and we're talking about cutting edge hardware. Samsung Captivate on ATT can be had for $50 from amazon.

Actually they wouldn't if the game were specifically designed to use the touchscreen.

Oh please. Any game designed for touchscreen will control just fine with adapted physical controls. Lots of games designed for physical controls cannot be adapted to touchscreen because it will just suck. like driving or action games.

As someone mentioned earlier, a kid isn't going to spend $200+2yr contract + SD cards so they can play games on a phone "with dedicated gaming controls". They will do what a normal kid would do and spend $200 to get a DS or whatever.

Kid's cant legally enter into a contract so your point is irrelevant.

Go ahead and wish for your PSP phone with dedicated gaming controls and $20 1GB games....just be prepared to watch it flop.

Uh not all PSP games are $20 and 1GB. Patapon 2 is $7.99 and 360 MB. Age of Zombies is $5 and 21 MB.

The only way I could see the PSP Phone catching on is if there is a non-phone version of the same gaming hardware sold along side it.

Well seeing how kids can't buy a cellphone on their own, its practically a given there will be a version without the phone bits.

 

[patsu]

It's a little hard to debate without seeing the product itself. Conceptually, I think the phone needs to have compelling phone capabilities to draw mainstream users. OTOH, the game machine needs its own twist. It's a difficult balancing act. I may pay anywhere from $299 to $0 for it, depending on its applications and sex appeal.

Secretly, I hope Sony makes a 3G compatible (or tethered) robot small enough to fit in my pocket, and connected to my PS3. Seriously.

 

[RudeCurve]

Oh please. Any game designed for touchscreen will control just fine with adapted physical controls. Lots of games designed for physical controls cannot be adapted to touchscreen because it will just suck. like driving or action games.

Touch specific games do not translate well to traditional controls. It CAN be done but the game becomes cumbersome. You obviously have never played touch specific games. A basic iPhone touch specific game like Super 7 can't be done with traditional controls and be natural and intuitive and fast. There a plenty of touch only games on DS that just don't translate well when trying to convert it to thumb pad and buttons. Any game that requires pinpoint tapping or dragging objects around the screen AINT GONNA WORK well End Of Story.

Kid's cant legally enter into a contract so your point is irrelevant.

They don't need to if their parents were to buy it for them, problem is kids won't want a $500 PSP phone when they could get a $200 DS.

Uh not all PSP games are $20 and 1GB. Patapon 2 is $7.99 and 360 MB. Age of Zombies is $5 and 21 MB.

Circular logic. Nobody buys a PS3 to play PS1 games. Nobody buys a Ferrari to go grocery shopping.

Well seeing how kids can't buy a cellphone on their own, its practically a given there will be a version without the phone bits.

Plenty of kids have cellphones. How they get them is irrelevant. Problem is they ain't gonna buy SD cards and $20 games for their $500 phone. If they get a phone it's gonna be an iPhone with $2.99 games. If a kid already has a normal phone then yeah they could upgrade for cheap, otherwise the phone without contract will be $500 or more. No kid is gonna buy a $500 PSP phone just so they could play GT PSP...or $5 mini-games...even kids are smarter than that.

Apple does use gaming in its ads fairly extensively, but the question is how would the iPhone sell if it didn't have *any* games? My contention is that it would still sell well.

I will agree with that. Before I got the iPhone I didn't really care about phone games, I got the iPhone for the phone and the apps...essentially for it's "portable micro computing abilities". However once I started downloading/playing some of the mini-games I really started like its gaming abilities. Still as you stated people will buy the iPhone regardless whether or not it had a library of games because the device itself is compelling or just plain cool and everybody has one.

 

[Crossbar]

I still feel that a gaming phone would have a hard time in the US market - a phone like this is going to be too high-end for the average parent to buy their child, and I think for a more professional set there would be a semi-negative stigma associated with having a phone with dedicated gaming functionality.

Who knows. But, it's a perceptual hill to climb IMO.

In Europe I think it would have its best chance, and potentially Japan as their trending towards smartphones increases.

I totally agree with your analysis above. It will be very interesting to see how they will position it on the market. ´The obvious target demographic would be the current PSP demographic in other words 15-30 years old male gear-heads, but Sony obviously want to expand that demographic and compete with the iPhone. The introduction of the Mini games was certainly a step in that direction.

I wonder if it will rely heavily on the PlayStation brand or if they will put more emphasis on Xperia or some other new brand to somewhat distance itself from a gaming only device, because me and probably many other "family guys" would feel a bit embarrassed using a "playstation phone". It´s still looked upon by many as a bit childish playing games around here and you are certainly exposing it more publicly when carrying around your gaming device compared to having a console at your home.

If they are not going for the more sophisticated market of the iPhone buyers by design, branding and targeted marketing they need to make it really cheap to make it a viable alternative for teenagers. And yes, the smartphone subscriptions rates in the US do not really allow it to become a hit among American teenagers.

I would say Sony has a really tough job defining the market for this device, they need to make it a really attractive device by design and functionality and find a brand that cater to a wide market.

 

[specwarGP2]

Touch specific games do not translate well to traditional controls. It CAN be done but the game becomes cumbersome. You obviously have never played touch specific games. A basic iPhone touch specific game like Super 7 can't be done with traditional controls and be natural and intuitive and fast. There a plenty of touch only games on DS that just don't translate well when trying to convert it to thumb pad and buttons. Any game that requires pinpoint tapping or dragging objects around the screen AINT GONNA WORK well End Of Story.

Good thing PSPhone has a touchscreen then. So now it's got all the bases covered

They don't need to if their parents were to buy it for them, problem is kids won't want a $500 PSP phone when they could get a $200 DS.

Well seeing that kids cant buy phones on their own, I'd say this device isn't meant for them in the first place, so youre point is irrelevant.

Circular logic. Nobody buys a PS3 to play PS1 games. Nobody buys a Ferrari to go grocery shopping.

What's your point? People buy PS3 to play PS3 games. People buy PSP to play PSP games. PSP games range anywhere from free (if you have PS+) to $40.

Plenty of kids have cellphones. How they get them is irrelevant. Problem is they ain't gonna buy SD cards and $20 games for their $500 phone. If they get a phone it's gonna be an iPhone with $2.99 games. If a kid already has a normal phone then yeah they could upgrade for cheap, otherwise the phone without contract will be $500 or more. No kid is gonna buy a $500 PSP phone just so they could play GT PSP...or $5 mini-games...even kids are smarter than that.

I dont understand why you're bringing up $500 phone. The actual cost of the phone is subsidized by the carrier. So that means $200 at the most, same as iphone, but after a certain period of time it will be sold at a much reduced cost or even free, while the iphone will still be $200

once again kids cant buy phones, so PSPhone isnt a product for them, just like an iphone isnt a product for kids either. But lets pretend a kid could actually buy a phone on his own. Why would he pick an iphone over a PSPhone based on gaming merits?