• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why does every DS game need to have AWESOME dual screen use?

O

olimario

Banned
Everytime DS screens are posted and the second screen utalization isn't the most innovative thing in the world, people complain about the game.

I'm afraid that people will dismiss titles that don't use the screen well even if they titles are very good games. So what if there is just a map and simple touch screen puzzles? It's still more than you would have normally and at least now you don't have to pause or stop playing to bring up a map.


I just don't see the big deal. We'll see our fair share of titles that make amazing use of the DS's features, but it's not a problem if some titles don't.
 
I guess most people view the dual-screens as a tradeoff for system power (somehow forgetting that the DS is a full $100 cheaper than the PSP), and because the games aren't as graphically impressive on DS they want that screen utilized to the full extent to get the most for their money or something. :lol
 
Because without awesome dual screen use, it just becomes another typical game. DS was suppose to revolutionize how we play. The touch screen does that to an extent but the touch screen is just another control input. Dual screens haven't really been used much in gaming and has potential to bring new gameplay. I see DS as bringing unique gameplay to the table that has never been done before. If the 2nd screen is just a map, it's a bit disappointing

p.s. dont take my posts seriously :( i'm sure scratch will be great
 
I think people would forget all about poor second screen usage if the games that highlighted said usage were better. That's the bottom line.
 
I think people would have demanded less if less of a deal was made of it. Some games use it really well but the bulk of them confine it to a map screen which is a pretty big letdown. Basically the Nintendo fans dont need convincing as much as people who game with nintendo on a much more casual level.
 
Wario64 said:
Because without awesome dual screen use, it just becomes another typical game. DS was suppose to revolutionize how we play. The touch screen does that to an extent but the touch screen is just another control inputl Dual screens haven't really been used much in gaming and has potential to bring new gameplay. I see DS as bringing unique gameplay to the table that has never been done before. If the 2nd screen is just a map, it's a bit disappointing
Click to expand...


But do you expect every developer to be on the cutting edge of ideas? Nanostrays dual screen and touch screen use suck, but Iridion II was an awesome shooter and this looks to be better. Does the value go down because it's on DS with slightly more features than it would have on GBA?

And what if we get an amazing action/adventure title on the DS, but all we get on the second screen are stats. Will it be any less of an awesome game?

I expect Nintendo, Capcom, and other big name developers to revolutionize further how we play, but I don't expect the same from smaller, handheld only devs.
 
olimario said:
Everytime DS screens are posted and the second screen utalization isn't the most innovative thing in the world, people complain about the game.

I'm afraid that people will dismiss titles that don't use the screen well even if they titles are very good games. So what if there is just a map and simple touch screen puzzles? It's still more than you would have normally and at least now you don't have to pause or stop playing to bring up a map.


I just don't see the big deal. We'll see our fair share of titles that make amazing use of the DS's features, but it's not a problem if some titles don't.
Click to expand...


because there is that nagging feeling that the game could have been "more".

how abou this for a game idea that eally uses the touch panel....no wait, i'd rather keep it to myself...
 
monchi-kun said:
because there is that nagging feeling that the game could have been "more".
Click to expand...

There is always that feeling regardless of console. I don't think there's any game that seems complete and seems perfect.

What if RE4 had better controls and camera?
What if Wind Waker was harder with more dungeons?
What if Jungle Beat was longer?
 
But do you expect every developer to be on the cutting edge of ideas?
Click to expand...

Of course not.

However, if they aren't going to use the unique features of the DS, "I" do not believe they should bother with the hardware at all. Without those unique features, the game would simply be better off on the PSP. There is no reason to create a lot of normal content for the DS (IMO). The DS hardware is a generation behind everything else and is unappealing in that regard. Visuals, audio, and controls all suffer in comparison to other platforms. It's a terrible machine for standard content.
 
i think the jokes about map screens and stupid touch gimmicks are at the expense of the ds hardware itself, not the games that understandably fail to utilize it. i'd like to see more ds games that make no real use of the touchscreen or second screen.
 
olimario said:
Everytime DS screens are posted and the second screen utalization isn't the most innovative thing in the world, people complain about the game.

I'm afraid that people will dismiss titles that don't use the screen well even if they titles are very good games. So what if there is just a map and simple touch screen puzzles? It's still more than you would have normally and at least now you don't have to pause or stop playing to bring up a map.


I just don't see the big deal. We'll see our fair share of titles that make amazing use of the DS's features, but it's not a problem if some titles don't.
Click to expand...

I agree. And for that matter, why do all PSP games have to use the full screen? Why not use just the middle, and leave the sides blank? I mean, just because Sony put it there doesn't mean developers should have to use it.
 
dark10x said:
Of course not.

However, if they aren't going to use the unique features of the DS, "I" do not believe they should bother with the hardware at all. Without those unique features, the game would simply be better off on PSP. There is no reason to create a lot of normal content for the DS (IMO).
Click to expand...


What if they thing they have a bigger audience on the DS? Enix only develops for the console they think will get them the biggest returns.

I agree that a game would be better off on PSP if it's not using the DS's unique features, but if that's the choice developers make to stay in business I don't see the problem.
 
olimario said:
There is always that feeling regardless of console. I don't think there's any game that seems complete and seems perfect.

What if RE4 had better controls and camera?
What if Wind Waker was harder with more dungeons?
What if Jungle Beat was longer?
Click to expand...

console games will always have that limitation because the control system hasn't really evolved since the PSOne era. although the touch panel can easily be likened to a mouse or tablet interface so much more can be done beyond simple interface exention or point and click gameplay.

gesture-based controls, games that learn the nuances of your handwriting, physics-based gameplay where the touch panel senses the velocity of your stroke, etc. Nintendo set-up the DS as a device that will enable revolutionary game design.
 
GhaleonEB said:
I agree. And for that matter, why do all PSP games have to use the full screen? Why not use just the middle, and leave the sides blank? I mean, just because Sony put it there doesn't mean developers should have to use it.
Click to expand...


It's not even close to being the same thing. A DS developer not using the touch screen well is like an XBOX developer only using XBOX LIVE for scoreboards. It's more than you would normall get, but it's not a great use of the feature.
 
Jarrod should come here and post a list of DS titles making GOOD/BAD use of the 2nd screen...I say this because I feel that there are more titles making dumb use of it than titles making good use of it.
 
Because somehow every game not using it has become some sort of sign of the impedning failure of the DS silly..
 
If anything I think Nintendo should take a lead on this one but as it stands the 2 games that take advantage of the DS (relative to their specific genres) aren't even from Nintendo.

Meteos and Pac Pix are great examples of touch gameplay that's visceral and compelling even in its simplicity because the experience relies on the panel.

One thing I keep hearing in dev circles is that Nintendo itself isn't encouraging too much use of the panel, the don't want a game to be fully dependent on it as a means of primary control and interaction. That's really messed up if you ask me.
 
ourumov said:
Jarrod should come here and post a list of DS titles making GOOD/BAD use of the 2nd screen...I say this because I feel that there are more titles making dumb use of it than titles making good use of it.
Click to expand...
Then you won't likely see that list from jarrod, unless Nintendo's favorite viral marketer has recently turned against the company or has a way to spin it in Nintendo's favor.
 
No, the game's structure makes it frankly unfun. It's an utterly forgettable piece of overdesigned and underimplemented dross, like much of the DS library.
 
Drinky Crow said:
No, the game's structure makes it frankly unfun. It's an utterly forgettable piece of overdesigned and underimplemented dross, like much of the DS library.
Click to expand...
Did you even play it?
 
From what I've read from the importers / Japan-native players, Pac Pix sounds quite alright. I'll see for myself obviously.

As for dual screen use:
Who cares if people moan about it?
If the game is good, it's another good game for DS. That's all I care about. And "Scratch! Viewtiful Joe" (which is the progenitor of this thread I imagine) looks very good.

And for the record I'd rather the second screen had a map/inventory/information than nothing at all if that's where the games going. Playing GBA games with one screen off is a very odd experience for me. It irritates me.

I assume everyone already knows how bollocks Ping Pals and Sprung are. They should be stricken from all future Nintendo DS discussion. So with that dealt with - the only conduct I don't like from devs on DS is porting content from GBA, and forcing total-SHIT touch screen use when it's totally unnecessary. Ridge Racer, Tiger Woods, The Urbs I'm lookin at you guys.

Someone's already mentioned Jarrod's release list threads. I'm pumped for a lot of Nintendo DS stuff now. It's looking more and more like a Gameboy-like release list with every passing day. Hell, it might even be looking better considering how few Gameboy games I actually owned. Within the year I will love this system more than my Gamecube. And I'll be the first to admit I love my Gamecube.
 
Why does every DS game need to have AWESOME dual screen use? #1
Click to expand...
Because this system is from Nintendo and not Sony and we all hate Nintendo and kiddystuff!

;) (although some over here have these feelings)
 
Wario64 said:
Because without awesome dual screen use, it just becomes another typical game. DS was suppose to revolutionize how we play. The touch screen does that to an extent but the touch screen is just another control input. Dual screens haven't really been used much in gaming and has potential to bring new gameplay. I see DS as bringing unique gameplay to the table that has never been done before. If the 2nd screen is just a map, it's a bit disappointing

p.s. dont take my posts seriously :( i'm sure scratch will be great
Click to expand...
Exactly. The DS was supposed to be a system that brought innovation to gaming. Relegating the screen to maps or the touch screen to menus is an obvious choice. Such a simple use doesn't make a game any better or worse, but when the strength of the system is in its differences from others, mainly the touchscreen, it feels completely secondary and undermines the uniqueness of it.

The Ridge Racer games are a bad, but quick example. If the same game was available to both DS and PSP, with the DS touch screen steering option versus better graphics and sound on the PSP, i'd easily choose the PSP version. If the DS version offered some compelling use of its features, like the dual screens, microphone, or touch screen, i might choose it over the PSP version.
 
What if they thing they have a bigger audience on the DS? Enix only develops for the console they think will get them the biggest returns.
Click to expand...

I couldn't possibly care less about the audience size. I'm not a publisher and sales are not my main concern. I prefer a superior product and that's something the DS just isn't going to deliver to me.

I would also prefer games to be released on the most powerful consoles, but even if they are not, the three front runners are all close to the point where they can handle the same types of games. The DS generational gap, however, places serious limits on what can be achieved.
 
According to the idea Nintendo wanted to give us about the DS as a secondary and revolutionary product the wise thing would be to put innovative titles making great use on the DS while others continuing being on the GBA.
Instead of this GBA is losing support in front of the DS...Well, not that I care since GBA already gave us a lot but then this is totally different from what we consumers were expecting so it's ok to bitch.
 
The second screen needs to be put to good use because all the games cost $30-40. If DS games start coming out around $20, I'll accept poor second screen implementation. In non-PSP-land, maybe the pricing would be acceptable, but Zoo Keeper sure as fuck doesn't look like it had the same level of developer costs as Wipeout or Lumines.
 
Clearly Zoo Keeper is the DS game with most development effort put into it, so pricing it at $40 is obvious proof that all DS games are an utter rip-off.
 
Jonnyram said:
Clearly Zoo Keeper is the DS game with most development effort put into it, so pricing it at $40 is obvious proof that all DS games are an utter rip-off.
Click to expand...

:lol

Anyway, Zoo Keeper is only indicative of what some 3rd parties are trying to pull with the new gen of portables. Most DS games 30 dollars, which is inline with top quality GBA games.
 
monchi-kun said:
If anything I think Nintendo should take a lead on this one but as it stands the 2 games that take advantage of the DS (relative to their specific genres) aren't even from Nintendo.

Meteos and Pac Pix are great examples of touch gameplay that's visceral and compelling even in its simplicity because the experience relies on the panel.

One thing I keep hearing in dev circles is that Nintendo itself isn't encouraging too much use of the panel, the don't want a game to be fully dependent on it as a means of primary control and interaction. That's really messed up if you ask me.
Click to expand...

I would say that Kirby depends on the touch screen for interaction and control....
 
I appreciate the concept with 2 separate screens, but sometimes I wish they'd just drop that kind of thinking and make a game that covers both screens if the game is more suitable for that kind of layout or if they can't come up with a good use for the 2nd screen that you might as well bring up by pressing a button or that can be added on the actual 'gameplay screen'. I think a game like Nanostray would be cool if it had both screens available for gameplay, for example...if it's technically possible, that is.
 
Having half of your view being used for a infrequantly used or uneeded map or menu with slightly quicker access is very annoying. It isnt really acceptable to half of your view of your TV being taken up by horrid HUD, map or menu either. they're have been far more effective ways to display a map ingame already been done with effective transparent huds.

You get the benefit of a large and high res screen in every single PSP game, its got nothing to do with actual graphical power. While alot of DS games you simply don't get the a large benefit of a second screen in many games, it seems almost useless in some, but you get all the disadvantages with every single game.

Nintendo the one who chose to make a design decision to go with two seperate screens instead of one large one, and they aren't even really showing a very good example of using it effectively either. So screw them, and screw the lazy developers who create nothing more then GBA or N64 games with needless uses of screen/touch.
 
olimario said:
It's not even close to being the same thing. A DS developer not using the touch screen well is like an XBOX developer only using XBOX LIVE for scoreboards. It's more than you would normall get, but it's not a great use of the feature.
Click to expand...
BS, Oli. Pixel utilization is a PRIMARY design concern in building a VIDEOgame. When we're talking about a developer not managing to use HALF of the total pixel real estate well, there's a much bigger problem than if they don't incorporate many (or any, for that matter) network features.

I don't blame the developers because its just a limitation imposed by the hardware design that they need to somehow work with. The problem is that too much has been made of how this design will inspire "revolution" or "innovation" which I'm sure is just the smartest approach to PR for the DS from Nintendo's standpoint, but becomes dogma around here which is what causes the problem in perception.
 
Jonnyram said:
Clearly Zoo Keeper is the DS game with most development effort put into it, so pricing it at $40 is obvious proof that all DS games are an utter rip-off.
Click to expand...
I picked Zoo Keeper because it was the most egregious example. I can't think of ANY DS game released in the US that is close to being "worth" the level of development effort that they charge for.
 
kaching said:
The problem is that too much has been made of how this design will inspire "revolution" or "innovation" which I'm sure is just the smartest approach to PR for the DS from Nintendo's standpoint, but becomes dogma around here which is what causes the problem in perception.
Click to expand...

Proponents of the DS constantly point to the inclusion of the second screen as leading to bold and innovative new gameplay ideas, while at the same time claiming that competing systems cannot possibly have any meaningful level of innovation because they don't have a second screen or a touch panel. Their own words essentially raise the bar way up there, and when DS games frequently fail to reach those lofty expectations, the critics have a field day.

Personally, it wouldn't bother me if even just a small portion of the library used the second screen in a manner that would be considered "innovative." Many games are using it just for maps and/or touch screen menus, but I don't really have a problem with it as long as the core gameplay is good.

Going with the Nanostray example, it appears to the lower screen mostly for score display, radar, and quick weapon selection, but that's fine with me because it looks like it'll be a solid shoot-em-up game. It's better for them to do that than to try and force some sort of gratuitous touch-screen oriented function just for the sake of "innovation," which could end up diluting or hindering enjoyment of the game.

The second screen should be used as an added resource, not as the raison d'etre with a big spotlight on it. Many DS games are getting poor reviews not because they didn't utilize the second screen to its utmost potential, but because the underlying gameplay is shallow and/or just plain crummy. "Innovative" doesn't always equate to "good."
 
Agent X said:
Going with the Nanostray example, it appears to the lower screen mostly for score display, radar, and quick weapon selection, but that's fine with me because it looks like it'll be a solid shoot-em-up game. It's better for them to do that than to try and force some sort of gratuitous touch-screen oriented function just for the sake of "innovation," which could end up diluting or hindering enjoyment of the game.
Click to expand...

I don't mind a game that DOESN'T try to do something overly innovative, but surely there must be something better to use a second screen for than a weapon selection screen. As I said before, in Nanostray they could link the two screens together, use them both as actual gameplay screens. I think it would be great and make sense, seeing as it's a vertically scrolling shooter.
And I agree that the devs shouldn't feel forced to do a touch-screen revolution in Nanostray, but at the same time it still feels a bit cheap to use 'half' the screen as a magnified on-screen interface.
 
I don't think people think less of the games for not utilising the screen or touch well enough, its more an issue of the system. I wouldn't consider a games quality to be worse due to poor use of touch as such, something like castlevania will be a great game regardless.

Though when great games like this DO come out with poor implementation of those features, it just makes you think "hey, woudlnt this game look alot nicer if the DS had just one big screen? oh well". Now especially with the PSP out, its making the DS look like even more of a poor system, certainly makes me wish something like CV was gonna go PSP rather then DS.

Obviously overall, the games make how good a system is, but when it comes down to it a poorly designed system can have alot of good games, and visa versa, the DS at the moment is pretty much on the losing end of both those battles at the moment though.
 
Oli, i can't care less for having my maps or menu on the other screens. When i look at it, i'm not playing in the upper screen so where is the time i save or the advantage it gives me?
Gimme one but bigger screen (touch enable if you want) and i'll press on a menu button or quick map function when i will want to look at the map.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

So why does every body like Hodd Towards?
2
58
225
StueyDuck replied
AYANEO Pocket DS dual-screen Android handheld game console hits Indiegogo for $400 and up
32
2K
SomeNorseGuy replied
Why can MS make a CoD game every year but it takes every other studio 5+ years to make game?
2
90
641
Killer8 replied
Abernic releasing sub $100 dual screen device soon
41
966
kapshin replied
I use AI daily, so why is it bad if game developers use it too?
2 3
120
890
Toots replied
Top Bottom