tahrikmili
Member
I am so tempted to type some banned phrases here.. 
PSP defects declared "Not Bogus" by Gamespot
- Thread starter Hardknock
- Start date
Red Dolphin
Member
If anyone doubts Nintendo's hardware quality they should watch that home video of some morons throwing a GameCube out the back of a moving ute tied to a rope. It get's dragged along the road for agers and gets knocked about pretty badly. They then recover the Cube, plug it back into the TV and to their amazement (and anyone watching the video) the Gamecube works perfectly fine! :lol
seismologist
Banned
I doubt the flying UMB thing is going to change. The PSP hardware is so packed in it's case it looks like it's ready to burst. Any twisting motion is bound to make something pop out.
seismologist
Banned
You guys twist my arm every time I see PSP hype going through the roof. I need to balance it out or else there's going to be some disappointed people here come March.
PSP looks different in real life than you'd think from the glamor shots going around the internet. The screen is actually alot smaller than you'd think.
PSP looks different in real life than you'd think from the glamor shots going around the internet. The screen is actually alot smaller than you'd think.
seismologist said:
Right, I'm sure you're right. I mean honestly, why would I believe my own eyes having seen a PSP on display in a store (too bad it's so overpriced outside of Japan, or I would have bought it) when I could listen to a known troll on GAF? Obviously trolls never lie! They're peaceloving truthful creatures with only the intention of helping other people with honest information from the goodness of their own hearts! :lol
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Screen being almost the size of a fucking iPod = YUO MAJOR TROLL.
KyotoMecca
Member
Anyone who says the PSP isn't the best thing ever is a DIRTY liar. Mine has a couple of these under-the-screen marks, but they are tiny and only notice on a plain white, bright screen - plus a dead pixel, but that only shows on a really black (eg loading) screen. And I am still overjoyed with it. This import purahcse is right up there with the thrill of the good old days of Dreamcast import thrills.
seismologist said:
The only problems is that:
- Your credibility is lower than zero, so you actually bashing something can have the opposite effect.
- A dozen or some forum members have actually bought a PSP, and are raving about it.
- The pictures of PSP wowing people right now are mostly pics taken by those members who bought one, and not glamor shots.
seismologist
Banned
Pedigree Chum said:
The screen's not the size of an iPod. maybe it's the size of an iPod mini. But it's basically like putting the 2 DS screens side by side and that's it. Maybe I'm the only one who thought it looks bigger in the screenshots. The screen's definitely not as big as some of the newer PDA's.
-SRV- said:
*cough*
Uhm, you do realize that handheld technology and console technology is entirely different, right? You know it takes a lot more advancement to fit something at CELL level into something the size of a PSP, right? Shit, if they found a way to do that at this very moment the thing would cost 1,200 or some such crap.
So no, the PSP is still very advanced technology. The fact that it is near-PS2 level visuals is quite a feat in its own right. Conceivably it could have been pushed further, but that does not negate the fact that it's definitely advanced.
seismologist said:
:lol :lol :lol :lol
And what screen would you say you would compare the PSP to in terms of portable gaming? Surely if this screen is not of impressive size there must be something else you acknowledge has a superior size screen for portable gaming. Mayhap you're wishing for that PSOne LCD Screen?
And the trolls go marching on... nah nah nah nah nah nah naaaaah
koam said:
And who are you? I don't shed a tear for any dead pixel; dead pixels are about the most pointless thing on Earth to complain about. If you have many by all means feel free to try to replace it... but dear God, don't complain about it. I have violent inclinations toward people who complain about dead pixels.
Amir0x said:
The things that are causing problems with the PSP are not related to the new technology. The defects are not related to the speed or power of the systems. Things like stuck buttons, bubbled screen, problems with the closing of UMD drives (while umd is new, there's no reason for it to have caused problems because minidisc and other similar drives have existed in the past, if it was a media problem i can understand, but not an actual drive problem like that) should not have occured. I'm done with this argument and I suggest you do the same because at the beggining, you sounded like a rabbid fanboy, now you're starting to sound like a cry baby, which i guess, isn't very far from being a fanboy.
I don't see the relevance of this question. I supposed the fact that i'm a junior member on GAF completely destroys my reputability? If it makes you feel any better, i've been on IGN for over 4 years, I've been a gamer for over 20 and i've been lurking on these boards for about 3 years now.Amir0x said:
koam said:
Ohohoh, you still don't get it... do you? First of all, you're a junior member. Calling me of all people a fanboy clearly draws out that you have no idea what my preferences is, so it's best you shut the fuck up.
But mindless insults aside, you still don't get it. PSP is new advanced technology. To say it's anything but is ridiculous. But that's not the point. Whenever new hardware of any kind ramps production up for the first time it will always have defects. Period. There's no debating this.
So tell me... what exactly am I a fanboy of? I'd like to know. I don't own a PSP and the only PSP game I'm even interested in atm is Lumines. Contrast to DS, where I'm interested in like six or seven games and I own it.
koam said:
Well, this answers all the questions about your stupidity.
monkeyrrun said:
...What? The DS has dead pixels. Every LCD based product on Earth has dead pixels. I didn't complain about it for DS and I won't complain about it for PSP. What does this make me a fanboy of? LCD screens?
Drinky Crow
Banned
The fact that you've been on IGN for four years destroys your credibility. Fuck, I couldn't stand four minutes of the blather in that cesspit of basrely cogent fanboy clusterfuckery.
Doom_Bringer
Banned
Drinky Crow said:
Ban him
Drinky Crow
Banned
AM I NOT MERCIFUL????
Something confuses me here.
Why do certain folks say that we should happily accept LCD screens with bad pixels, again? I know that the manufacturing process isn't perfect, but I am having a hard time thinking of another industry where the consumer is expected to purchase a product and be HAPPY with imperfections in it.
To paraphrase the Xbox lovers, I don't care about the finances of the company -- I care about what they give me.
Why do certain folks say that we should happily accept LCD screens with bad pixels, again? I know that the manufacturing process isn't perfect, but I am having a hard time thinking of another industry where the consumer is expected to purchase a product and be HAPPY with imperfections in it.
To paraphrase the Xbox lovers, I don't care about the finances of the company -- I care about what they give me.
DavidDayton said:
No, you shouldn't "Happily accept it". You just shouldn't complain about it. It's inherent in the process, there's pretty much no way they could change this without raising the price on the products dramatically.
So in other words: Get it replaced if you can and go on. Not worth complaining about.
Amir0x said:
I'm still rather confused by this... in every manufacturing process, there is a margin of error. In most other product lines, companies destroy (or sell as "factory rejects") products which are improperly made. However, LCD screen production seems to hinge on pawning off faulty screens on the consumers, in the hope that no one complains. Am I right in this?
DavidDayton said:
*smacks forehead*
LCD Products are made in such a way that most of the time the manufacturer doesn't even know the dead pixels are on it. Sometimes they [the dead pixels] even develop after they're shipped off. It's something that is inherent in the process. It's a flaw in the technology, so-to-speak. It's quite literally an impossibility to have a zero dead pixel shipment policy unless you want to pay 1000 dollars for a 4 inch monitor. The best we can do is get quiet and kindly ask to exchange our products. And when we are able to exchange it all is good in the world.
Amir0x said:
Ok. Humor me for a moment -- I'm curious about this. Why is it an impossibility to have a zero dead pixel shipment policy? Can't you do quality testing on the units? I can understand that given the sheer number of units being produced, it may not be economically feasible, but that seems to be (as you said) a flaw with the current LCD production setup.
I guess what I mean is what, exactly, is the economic problem with only selling working LCD units? Is it that the testing necessary to check ALL produced units is too expensive, or is it that so many faulty units are produced, companies have to sell faulty units rather than take the loss on scrapping them?
DavidDayton said:
Bullseye.
Basically making an LCD screen is like making a giant computer chip. You take glass, then you use photolithography to deposit metal and semiconductor layers on the glass to form transistors. 1 transistor controls 1 pixel.
If a piece of dust gets onto the glass when you're doing this, BAM, you get a dead or stuck pixel. That's why big LCD displays are so expensive. The bigger it is, the more likely there was some manufacturing defect, and a broken pixel somewhere on the surface of the display.
There are ways around this, like putting extra transistors per pixel so that if there is a faulty one, you can just disable it and use a different transistor to control the pixel.
But nothing can remove all possibility that a broken pixel will happen, and it's just too expensive to scrap a screen with a few busted pixels at current yields, so manufacturers will just have a return policy that says "we consider an LCD with N dead pixels to be acceptable".
aaaaa0 said:
Which is, in my ever so humble opinion, unacceptable. I don't really care if a company's manufacturing techniques result in shoddy products -- they shouldn't be selling broken equipment in the first place. I guess I'm not being "reasonable," given the problems inherent in the process, but perhaps massive LCD production just needs a lot more time to mature?
Query: has this ALWAYS been a problem? If so, why didn't we see dead pixels in large numbers of consumer products until recently?
Again, I fully understand how avoiding dead pixels in the manufacturing process might be impossible -- I'm just saying that I don't see how it's acceptable to sell units with defective pixels.
DavidDayton said:
Yes, its always been a problem. When I was looking into buying my LCD projector and TV, this was raised. I made sure to purchase through a retailer that would check my unit before shipping for dead pixels, but this meant paying slightly more. The unit technically would have been fine with up to 4 dead pixels around the edge, or one in the centre.
Its like half life 2 requiring an internet connection to play. You may not like it, but its on the box so you choose whether to buy or not. Simple fact is most LCD manufacturers have the same policy, so if you want LCD you accept it or find a sympathetic retailer.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
If you don't even want to consider replacing a possibly damaged LCD product, you can just refuse to buy any of them, and be done with it. Wait untill something better comes along then buy that. Complaing about it will not help any.
As other said, even the most rigorous QA will not eliminate dead pixels from the LCD screens as many of them develop after the product is already shipped and used for some days. (Luckily, from my own experience, dead pixels usually develop in the first week of use or so, and the problem does not get worse.)