Why we're skipping Nintendo DS
- Thread starter Random_Hajile
- Start date
iced lightning
Member
Phoenix said:
You just can't take the fact that the DS has a control scheme that is comparable to using a mouse/keyboard for first person shooters. My use of the word rival was fitting and you just can't admit it. Have you even tried a DS? Haha I feel dumber for even arguing this with you.
Why would it need a larger screen when it could have 2? It can go both ways... you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and it's stupid.
A problem just as easily solved by using only a portion of the single screen for touchscreen control. There was no need for dual screens to arise as a solution to the issues a touch screen raises, as PDAs have demonstrated for years now through the use of "silkscreens".Kobun Heat said:
Hey, you know what, I agree with Jer. And yet I'm still kinda getting sucked into the launch madness (no preorder though)...I love my new toys, what can I say. But yeah, there's hardly anything worth owning at launch - very disappointing, I was hoping Nintendo would have a killer app ready for launch that would show everyone the potential of the touchscreen/microphone/etc...even so, this machine feels so much like a stopgap that it isn't funny.
Really, I should wait since waiting for Nintendo to deliver is a dicey proposition at best, but still...well, we'll see
Really, I should wait since waiting for Nintendo to deliver is a dicey proposition at best, but still...well, we'll see
Here is a summary of the portables:
DS: Plays like shit, games look like shit
PSP: Plays like shit, games look great
Why not at least support the portable that gives us eye pleasing candy? Either way the gameplay experience will be broken so I vote for the one that gives me good visuals. I'm not too keen on the control schemes of either portable. I just dislike the DS setup more.
DS: Plays like shit, games look like shit
PSP: Plays like shit, games look great
Why not at least support the portable that gives us eye pleasing candy? Either way the gameplay experience will be broken so I vote for the one that gives me good visuals. I'm not too keen on the control schemes of either portable. I just dislike the DS setup more.
Phoenix
Member
iced lightning said:
Oh yes, because it apparently causes me psychological turmoil to know that something could be as good as something else. :rolleyes
Right - up to the point where you say
Just because its a revolution for portable gaming doesn't mean it rivals or even approaches the capability of an actual mouse/keyboard combination.
Yes, have you?
I don't think your feeling dumber has anything to do with me. I think that may just be your state of being. But at least you're being truthful to yourself.
Right - its stupid because someone might think that this methodology isn't as revolutionary as you think. Oh please merciful intellect spare us from your overpowering mastery of the Engligh language, debating skills and fan boy logic.
Kobun Heat
Member
I'd imagine it's cheaper to use two smaller screens than one big one, it probably saves battery life, and you have the added, non-trivial advantage of being able to fold the whole thing in half.kaching said:
soundwave05
Member
MrparisSM said:
Zuh? Who the hell actually plays anything here before writing it off or claiming it to be the greatest thing ever?
iced lightning
Member
Phoenix said:
I just think it's great that I can play a FPS with precise controls on a portable. It's wayyyy better than a keyboard and mouse will ever be. Yes, the rivalry is over and the touchscreen/d-pad wins!
Do you realize how it's stupid to even argue about this? It's the closest thing a portable will ever have to a mouse/keyboard style setup. That's all there is to it. Move on.
I'm not a fanboy in the least. I just happen to really enjoy the DS. OMG !! Now please whine some more about how the screen could just be bigger instead of having 2. Those nuts with their 2 screens... I mean, the second is just completely useless.
Agent X
Member
iced lightning said:
Ever use a Tapwave Zodiac?
It's got a 480x320 pixel screen, all of which is touch sensitive. The unit can also be rotated 90 degrees so that the you have a 320x480 vertically-oriented touch screen.
Keep in mind that you're capable of doing split-screen on this device. A developer could hypothetically port a DS game over to Zodiac, position the unit in portrait (vertical) orientation, do a top-and-bottom split screen, and either of the Zodiac's logical "screens" would have two definite and unarguable advantages over the DS's hardware restrictions, no matter how you try to spin it:
1. Either Zodiac screen could be touch sensitive, as opposed to only the lower screen on the DS.
2. Either Zodiac screen is higher resolution than either DS screen.
There's also the fact that you could do a custom split, such as a 320x320 area on top and a 160x320 area on the bottom. You could also merge the screens back into one large 320x480 screen area, with no physical borders or breaks. You could also rotate the device and get back to 480x320. You could do all of this on one unit, and even within the same game if the game designer wanted to. On the contrary, you can't do any of this at all on the DS because of the way the hardware is designed.
Before someone decides to ask the obvious follow-up question about screen protection, here's the answer: You use the included screen flap, which can fold behind the unit when not in use (or you can remove it altogether if you want).
Size comparison with original Game Boy Advance:
So, now exactly what is the advantage of having two tiny screens as opposed to a single, high resolution, completely touch sensitive screen?
Agent X said:Ever use a Tapwave Zodiac?
It's got a 480x320 pixel screen, all of which is touch sensitive. The unit can also be rotated 90 degrees so that the you have a 320x480 vertically-oriented touch screen.
Keep in mind that you're capable of doing split-screen on this device. A developer could hypothetically port a DS game over to Zodiac, position the unit in portrait (vertical) orientation, do a top-and-bottom split screen, and either of the Zodiac's logical "screens" would have two definite and unarguable advantages over the DS's hardware restrictions, no matter how you try to spin it:
1. Either Zodiac screen could be touch sensitive, as opposed to only the lower screen on the DS.
2. Either Zodiac screen is higher resolution than either DS screen.
There's also the fact that you could do a custom split, such as a 320x320 area on top and a 160x320 area on the bottom. You could also merge the screens back into one large 320x480 screen area, with no physical borders or breaks. You could also rotate the device and get back to 480x320. You could do all of this on one unit, and even within the same game if the game designer wanted to. On the contrary, you can't do any of this at all on the DS because of the way the hardware is designed.
Before someone decides to ask the obvious follow-up question about screen protection, here's the answer: You use the included screen flap, which can fold behind the unit when not in use (or you can remove it altogether if you want).
Size comparison with original Game Boy Advance:
So, now exactly what is the advantage of having two tiny screens as opposed to a single, high resolution, completely touch sensitive screen?
The price maybe? Do you even know how much the Zodiac costs? Also when they are using the split screen and you have to rotate the unit, how the hell are you gonna play the thing with buttons on the top of the unit and some at the bottom of the unit?? NOt to mention using the stylus!
krypt0nian
Banned
Trying to argue the relativity of the Zodiac....I loves me some of dat!
Actually, I see a couple of advantages with using two screens rather than splitting one screen in two parts. First of all, when using the stylus your hand won't obstruct the view of the second screen (as much as it potentially could when using only one screen), because of how the two screens are separated.
And secondly, the two screens are separated in such a defined way that it's very easy to see where the line between the two screens go. I mean, you don't even have to think twice about it. Doing a "simulation" of the two-screen setup on one big touchscreen wouldn't make the space between the two screens as obvious.
And secondly, the two screens are separated in such a defined way that it's very easy to see where the line between the two screens go. I mean, you don't even have to think twice about it. Doing a "simulation" of the two-screen setup on one big touchscreen wouldn't make the space between the two screens as obvious.
Agent X
Member
MrparisSM said:
Uh, yes, explodet just mentioned it above!
MrparisSM said:
I'd imagine the same way would do it with the DS, when you're trying to use the joypad, A/B/X/Y cluster, L trigger, and R trigger, while using the stylus, all at the same time. You put your hands on the buttons and grip the stylus with your teeth.
Wait...that is how you would use the stylus while accessing all of the buttons while on the DS, right?
Kiriku said:
Hmm, I'm not sure I agree with this. I've played touch-screen games on PDAs before and never really found that to be much of a problem. Besides, wouldn't this also be an issue on the DS, if you're trying to see what you're supposed to be tapping on the lower screen?
Kiriku said:
Well, the game designer could simply draw a graphical border on the screen to illustrate where the split takes place.
The possible advantage of the physical border (as with the DS) would be that you could feel where you're supposed to "stop," whereas with a logical split, you could move past the border. So, I suppose that could be an advantage for the DS arrangement...but by and large, I'd much rather have the versatility afforded by the single-screen arrangement I described, as it has many more advantages overall.
Good response!
Random_Hajile
Member
How about 7 screens? I like, would make MEtroid even better!
Random_Hajile
Member
GI: Can you comment on any ideas of when we might see Game Boy Advance 2?
Kaplan: In your lifetime.
Kaplan: In your lifetime.
The touch screen could easily be done with one of those trackpads you get on laptops - not the nipples, the other ones. Then you have all the 'OMG FPS keyboard mouse controls' you want, plus don't have to spend money on a screen just for a controller...
The only benefit I can see from the 2nd screen is for context sensitive touch menus. when you want to affect something in the top screen. Otherwise, one touchscreen woudl be enough. Enough for wario ware, enough for animal crossing.
How can you not fold the console if you only have one screen? What does GBASP do? You could easily have a flip top hard cover.
The only benefit I can see from the 2nd screen is for context sensitive touch menus. when you want to affect something in the top screen. Otherwise, one touchscreen woudl be enough. Enough for wario ware, enough for animal crossing.
How can you not fold the console if you only have one screen? What does GBASP do? You could easily have a flip top hard cover.
Do The Mario
Unconfirmed Member
This guy is classic LOL
Random_Hajile
Member
very good use of the top screen.
Ah clouds... see if the PSP can do that!
Do The Mario
Unconfirmed Member
Random_Hajile those pics are worthy of a new thread!
Whether its one 512x192 screen or two 256x192 screens the amount of pixels that need to be powered and illuminated is the same. About the only cost/energy savings you might get out of the dual screen approach is that they only touch-enabled 1/2 of the screen real estate but I really can't imagine that as a significant cost factor. There are PDAs in the same price range as the DS with 320x320 screens (slightly higher total pixel count than the DS has) that are fully touch sensitive.Kobun Heat said:
As for the clamshell design being an advantage, I'd say the only advantage that it truly offers is more surface area for I/O options, but this isn't strictly necessary in the DS's case Durability is not actually helped by incorporating a hinge mechanism into a portable device - it introduces a weak point that's more susceptible to breakage, than a single chassis case design would have. As someone who has owned a few clamshell PDAs, I can also say that the claims that such a design protects the screen are overblown. No clamshell device is airtight that I've seen (including the DS) so any particulate matter to be found in a pocket or wherever you are storing the device can still get on the screen. For a touchscreen device this is actually one of the biggest dangers for scratches, unless regularly cleaned off.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Posted by Deg:
I've noticed that you keep repeating this like some kind of mantra in every thread where zodiac is mentioned, but the tapwave screen is pretty much standard PDA screen quality, which are by all the accounts of people who have seen the PSP, NOT better than PSP screen in any way (colors, contrast, brightness, retention time) except for somewhat higher resolution. If you are implying that Zodiac has more expensive or better quality screen than PSP, that's flat out wrong.
J. Horwitz
Member
I'm not looking to reinvigorate this thread, but I did want to respond personally (and in my own name) to a few of the points that were made here after Random Hajile re-posted my blog entry in the forums. It took a few days to get my account registered here once I saw the re-posting, so sorry for the delay.
First, thanks Hajile for re-posting my thoughts here, but I wasn't looking to stoke the flames of fan controversy on Gaming-Age. What I posted was directed at iPodlounge's readership (1.2m and counting), not hard-core gamers.
Second, it wasn't an issue of "former game editor not getting free hardware." I do pretty well for myself regardless of whether I get the DS for free or not. The issue from my standpoint is whether the DS was worth recommending to my readers (not GA readers, but my readers) given its launch library and features. My statement was that it wasn't, at least yet. And I stand by that.
Third, Super Mario 64 in my opinion should have been replaced by an original title, not another re-release of old Nintendo software. No one, even Nintendo's viral marketers and rabid fans in this forum, can argue with a straight face that the company has been as prolific and timely in releasing new software over the last 4-6 years as they were before that. Nintendo has become a regurgitator of old games with slightly new gloss, and they are most offensive with this practice at the launch of a new portable system. They employ enough people to create at least an entirely new set of maps for Mario 64 (not just a few and some minigames), but they don't do this because they know they can sucker people in with much less effort. I'm standing up and saying that it's becoming unacceptable. And I'm sick of paying for the same game over and over. No more.
Fourth, I still think that the core N64 experience from SM64-DS is royally screwed up because of the DS's control schemes, detracting significantly from what is without question one of the greatest games ever made. Some of the mini-games are great, but they don't justify what's happened to the core N64 title. An analog control would have fixed these problems entirely; the dual screen does nothing to compensate for this. Nintendo made an ad hoc and retrospectively bad decision to toss in the second screen (a significant expense) solely to offer something Sony didn't in its PSP. Who would have guessed that a cheap analog joystick (and maybe some texture filtering) would have been more than enough to satisfy people?
Jeremy Horwitz of iPodlounge and the iPodlounge Buyers' Guide
First, thanks Hajile for re-posting my thoughts here, but I wasn't looking to stoke the flames of fan controversy on Gaming-Age. What I posted was directed at iPodlounge's readership (1.2m and counting), not hard-core gamers.
Second, it wasn't an issue of "former game editor not getting free hardware." I do pretty well for myself regardless of whether I get the DS for free or not. The issue from my standpoint is whether the DS was worth recommending to my readers (not GA readers, but my readers) given its launch library and features. My statement was that it wasn't, at least yet. And I stand by that.
Third, Super Mario 64 in my opinion should have been replaced by an original title, not another re-release of old Nintendo software. No one, even Nintendo's viral marketers and rabid fans in this forum, can argue with a straight face that the company has been as prolific and timely in releasing new software over the last 4-6 years as they were before that. Nintendo has become a regurgitator of old games with slightly new gloss, and they are most offensive with this practice at the launch of a new portable system. They employ enough people to create at least an entirely new set of maps for Mario 64 (not just a few and some minigames), but they don't do this because they know they can sucker people in with much less effort. I'm standing up and saying that it's becoming unacceptable. And I'm sick of paying for the same game over and over. No more.
Fourth, I still think that the core N64 experience from SM64-DS is royally screwed up because of the DS's control schemes, detracting significantly from what is without question one of the greatest games ever made. Some of the mini-games are great, but they don't justify what's happened to the core N64 title. An analog control would have fixed these problems entirely; the dual screen does nothing to compensate for this. Nintendo made an ad hoc and retrospectively bad decision to toss in the second screen (a significant expense) solely to offer something Sony didn't in its PSP. Who would have guessed that a cheap analog joystick (and maybe some texture filtering) would have been more than enough to satisfy people?
Jeremy Horwitz of iPodlounge and the iPodlounge Buyers' Guide
krypt0nian
Banned
Random_Hajile said:
very good use of the top screen.
Ah clouds... see if the PSP can do that!
Your posts reek of desperation.
Jonnyboy117
Member
I'm way too late to this thread to actually comment on the original post, but I'll try...
This guy's point of view is a valid one, and I respect people who feel this way about the DS. I think the arguments are completely understandable and need to be addressed by Nintendo in how they market and eventually improve upon the system with Nintendo DSP. I do not like, at all, how this guy is essentially reviewing the system and half of its launch titles without actually playing the final versions of any of them. He is delivering this grand criticism of the system and its software based only on what he has read or heard from other people.
This guy's point of view is a valid one, and I respect people who feel this way about the DS. I think the arguments are completely understandable and need to be addressed by Nintendo in how they market and eventually improve upon the system with Nintendo DSP. I do not like, at all, how this guy is essentially reviewing the system and half of its launch titles without actually playing the final versions of any of them. He is delivering this grand criticism of the system and its software based only on what he has read or heard from other people.
seismologist
Banned
DS is worth it even for the enhancements to GBA games. Same reason that the SP was worth it when it came out.
But of course the DS offers so much more. And even though most of it is a remake, Mario 64 is the kind of killer ap you normally dont see at system launch.
Dude. you should have quit while you were ahead. Have you even played Mario DS? I can't count the number of times just the simple map on the "ad hoc and retrospectively bad decision" second screen has been a tremendous amount of help.
But of course the DS offers so much more. And even though most of it is a remake, Mario 64 is the kind of killer ap you normally dont see at system launch.
Dude. you should have quit while you were ahead. Have you even played Mario DS? I can't count the number of times just the simple map on the "ad hoc and retrospectively bad decision" second screen has been a tremendous amount of help.
I agree that the DS would have been much better if Nintendo would have included an analog stick. Much like using a keyboard on emulated NES games, the touch screen works well enough but is always a little distracting. Analog is the standard for 3D control. Not including it is going to hurt every 3D game on the platform.
As for the two screens, I like them being separate, but I think they should have both been touch sensitive. Having two screens instead of one is great for maps, menus, text, and other secondary information. It's great for providing two viewpoints because the screens have a little space between them. Who wants all that junk cluttering up one screen? However, only having one touch screen is going to be limiting. Games that want to use the touch screen extensively are going to have to limit themselves to the bottom screen. If devs also want analog control, then that's an additional problem.
As for the two screens, I like them being separate, but I think they should have both been touch sensitive. Having two screens instead of one is great for maps, menus, text, and other secondary information. It's great for providing two viewpoints because the screens have a little space between them. Who wants all that junk cluttering up one screen? However, only having one touch screen is going to be limiting. Games that want to use the touch screen extensively are going to have to limit themselves to the bottom screen. If devs also want analog control, then that's an additional problem.
seismologist
Banned
Xellos said:
Not all 3D games rely on analog the way Mario 64 does. I'm playing Madden for instance with the d-pad and can hardly tell the difference.
seismologist said:
I don't think I've used a d-pad for a 3D game since before the original Mario 64 back in 1996. Hundreds of 3D games use the analog in ways similar to Mario.
Imagine if, for example, the Xenon and PS3 came out and had touch pads instead of analog sticks. I don't think anybody would be happy about that.
seismologist
Banned
Xellos said:
I agree. But that's different. Playing a game on a miniature screen in the palm of your hand is a different feel from playing on a huge TV. Just like I dont think a full size analog stick is suited for portables.
It's amazing how much precision I get out of the touch screen when controlling Mario. It works well, IMO. much better than I ever expected. But for the average 3D game I think the d-pad would do the trick.
seismologist
Banned
You know speaking of Xenon and PS3. In some ways I hope they do evolve beyond basic analog controllers. Metroid Hunters shows us how much better precision you get from touch screen controls in first person shooters.
Kobun Heat
Member
:lol :lol :lolJ. Horwitz said:
seismologist said:
I guess. No reason they couldn't pop a little touch pad like on laptops on the controller. Would that give you the same 'mouselook' effect? How about a little trackball like some people use instead of a mouse?
Left hand - analog stick at the top, touchpad at the bottom.
Right hand - buttons, analog stick, trackball down by the thumb.
Analog shoulder triggers(like DC)
Lovely
If you want to go the whole hog, make the touchpad a little colour LCD touchscreen
mrklaw said:I guess. No reason they couldn't pop a little touch pad like on laptops on the controller. Would that give you the same 'mouselook' effect? How about a little trackball like some people use instead of a mouse?
Left hand - analog stick at the top, touchpad at the bottom.
Right hand - buttons, analog stick, trackball down by the thumb.
Analog shoulder triggers(like DC)
Lovely
If you want to go the whole hog, make the touchpad a little colour LCD touchscreen
Controllers are already expensive enough, kthx.
iced lightning
Member
I can play mario 64 just as well with the touch screen as I can with an analog stick. Sure, the learning curve is definitely higher, but to be honest it just makes it that much more rewarding when you kick ass with it. I have to think that all of these people bitching about the controls in Mario 64 haven't played the game past 20-30 stars using only the touch screen... either that or you're really slow and there's no hope for you.
heavy liquid
Member
I've only got twelve stars, and I've adapted fine to the d-pad (which I actually prefer to the touchscreen). Would I have liked an analog stick? Sure. Is it "royally screwed up", "detracting significantly" from the gaming experience? Not in the least, for me.
I've also never understood the problem people have with Nintendo being a "regurgitator of old games". I'm more than happy now being able to play Mario 64 while on the go, and a whole new generation of kids are introduced to some great AAA games. I'm sure more than a few ten year olds have never played Mario 64 and/or some of the other classic ports to the GBA. If you already have a game and don't want a portable version of it, don't buy it!
Most reviews also seem to agree that Mario 64 DS is much more that a port with "slightly new gloss", and I'd have to agree. There are so many differences, both big and subtle, that I feel like I'm playing an entirely different game at times.
The fact that Nintendo was able to launch the DS and release Mario 64 DS within a year of being announced is a huge achievement. I'm looking forward to the next wave of first party software coming out within the next three months or so. WarioWare, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing and Yoshi's Touch & Go...
I've also never understood the problem people have with Nintendo being a "regurgitator of old games". I'm more than happy now being able to play Mario 64 while on the go, and a whole new generation of kids are introduced to some great AAA games. I'm sure more than a few ten year olds have never played Mario 64 and/or some of the other classic ports to the GBA. If you already have a game and don't want a portable version of it, don't buy it!
Most reviews also seem to agree that Mario 64 DS is much more that a port with "slightly new gloss", and I'd have to agree. There are so many differences, both big and subtle, that I feel like I'm playing an entirely different game at times.
The fact that Nintendo was able to launch the DS and release Mario 64 DS within a year of being announced is a huge achievement. I'm looking forward to the next wave of first party software coming out within the next three months or so. WarioWare, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing and Yoshi's Touch & Go...
iced lightning said:
I have 90 stars and got a few of the more difficult stars in one try (e.g. top of the clock on the fastest setting). It's not that the controls don't work, it's just that they're a hassle. I hooked up N64 Mario yesterday to compare, and even though the touch pad works for this game, analog control is much better (especially for flips).
Putting aside the analog vs touch screen issue, though, Mario DS is an excellent update. It's not like some of Nintendo's rip-offs where they charge $20 for ONE emulated 1st/2nd generation NES game. Mario DS has new levels, new power-ups, new characters, re-done graphics, new mini-games, an improved camera, and tweaked level design. I'd like Mario 64 2, but at $30 I think this is OK.
J. Horwitz
Member
I played the system for the first time (like most people) at E3 2004 and spent time with every one of the demo kiosks inside Nintendo's booth (except for like 1 oddball Japanese kiosk in the corner). Then I played it again before launch and the posting I made on my blog, and have been using it for nearly the past week as well, before my posting on GA-Forums today. And I've put a fair amount of time into SM64-DS (which I have here) as well as Feel The Magic, which to my way of thinking does far more to justify the DS's existence than SM64.
Congratulations are in order for anyone who can master the new touch control system of SM64-DS. My feeling is that SM64 succeeded to the extent that it did because it made Mario's complex moves/controls so simple for anyone to enjoy. SM64-DS makes the same moves and controls a chore to learn and master.
And in brief response to Chris Kohler's [bullshit bullshit bullshit] thing, I'll simply say that I would have expected more from someone whose previous writings I've respected so much.
Congratulations are in order for anyone who can master the new touch control system of SM64-DS. My feeling is that SM64 succeeded to the extent that it did because it made Mario's complex moves/controls so simple for anyone to enjoy. SM64-DS makes the same moves and controls a chore to learn and master.
And in brief response to Chris Kohler's [bullshit bullshit bullshit] thing, I'll simply say that I would have expected more from someone whose previous writings I've respected so much.
Similar threads
- Featured
- Poll