It's a sorry state of affairs when a media player like the
Zune HD has more polygon-pushing power than the latest handheld videogame consoles on the market. If rumors are to be believed, Nintendo and Sony will set things straight with their next-generation portables -- at least for a little while. We've already heard that the successor to Nintendo's DS will have
Tegra power, but the current speculation is that it'll be a
Tegra 2 chip, promising
twice the power of the current iteration. On the Sony side the PSP2 is apparently shaping up to use an offspring of the IMG PowerVR graphics found on the iPhone, said to be theoretically superior to what the DS2 will be able to achieve but costing more, being more difficult to develop for, and not shipping until sometime in 2011 -- potentially a year later than the DS2. In other words it's standard operating procedure if these rumors are to be believed, but even if there aren't any surprises in this showdown we'll be there in the front row with popcorn to watch the bloodshed.
posted November 16th 2009 9:58AM
@Templarian:
Read the post above again... the DS2 is slated to -have- the Tegra2...
@Gir: Yeah, and Wii was slated to have a three-core G5-equivalent processor.
Don't believe Nintendo hardware rumours (at least not until like a few weeks before announcement); that one I just quoted above was a real rumour at the time. They seem to have a pretty good lockdown on such leaks, and they will definitely consider cheapness and low battery consumption ahead of other factors. Tegra (which should be reasonably cheap by the end of the year or next year or whenever this is supposed to drop) sounds a lot more likely to me than Tegra 2 (which will presumably be really expensive initially).
Or to put it another way, the CPU in the original DS was way below the fastest ARM chips available at the time (ie without changing any other aspect of the design they could've doubled the speed - but it would've cost more and the battery life would've gone down), and I'd expect the same to be true of DS2. A current Tegra at low end of clock speed range would still give it hugely more power than DS.
I'm perfectly willing to believe Nintendo are investigating and prototyping systems with Tegra 2, I just think - at least if they release in the next twelve months - they'll probably go with something cheaper.
"...said to be theoretically superior to what the DS2 will be able to achieve but costing more, being more difficult to develop for, and not shipping until sometime in 2011 -- potentially a year later than the DS2."
My question is, why the hell would Sony be looking at doing to the PSP2 exactly what it did to the PS3? It'll be even worse for them because the PSP2 won't have a bluray player, i.e. some other feature that will make it worth the extra cost.
Also, if anything can be learned from the fact that games developed across the X360 and PS3 sometimes wind up with noticeably worse graphics on the machine with superior hardware, its that raw power in a gaming device is not everything. There are cost-benefit aspects to developing for certain platforms that could leave that superior hardware largely untapped, just as many PS3 games have done to it.
I'm not trying to bash PS3 or Sony, but when I read that phrase I could not believe how out-of-touch with the gaming market Sony execs seem to be. They lost $4 billion so far on PS3 largely because it was really expensive, came out a year after its competition, and did not have a high enough attachment rate until recently for many developers to see the value in developing their games specifically for its superior graphical platform.
Good job Sony, keep headed right on this path; I'm sure your entertainment devices division has another $4 billion to lose.
Too be fair to Sony, the PSP has actually been a success for them. They made money and built up enough of an install base that they can hope to have some carryover with a PSP2. I mean, the PSP sells VERY well in Japan, managing to top the charts a few times. This isn't like the PS3, where Sony was going in with a new everything - Cell Processor, Blu-ray media, etc. etc.
the gameboy has historically been underpowered compared to the competition, yet it has dominated the market since day one. Hardware isn't everything.
Absolutely. Using the tegra would be a continuation of this strategy, seeing as all the functions (graphics, memory, in/out) are on the same die. It'll be cheaper, and give better battery life because of this, both of which are probably more important than balls-out power in a handheld.
Agreed. Sega was the perfect example. Despite them being my all-time favourite, they thought that as long as they had the best hardware the industry was theirs.
Now look at em... poor Sonic has to put up with %$@^%$ Mario.
Wait shouldn't it be DS5? As there's the original DS, DS Lite, DSi and DSi LL (cool j)/XL
there won't be a tegra based ds, Nintendo will just pull the original DS out of the closet and make it bigger, call it the DS Classis XL
:rollseyes:
Shouldn't it be PSP 5? After all, there's the PSP, the PSP Slim (2000), the PSP 3000, and the PSPgo. Durr, there won't be a new PSP; Sony will just pull the original PSP out of the closet and cut another feature.
how hard is it to approprietly identify the market your spamming?
I would use my PSP for music more readily than I would use a Zune for gaming
As long as the hardware is better then the original the ds2 will be good. People fail to understand that the thing that makes the ds great is the games. The only way anothe rhandheld can totally win is if they buy nintendo themselves.
Nintendo and their games is what makes their systems good.
Only one thing can be said: about fucking time.
I love Nintendo not because they bring the most expensive and powerful systems to the market. I love them because they never forgot how to make awesome games. Sure they have a lot of shovelware, but this is one industry where I have no qualms saying I don't tend purchase media outside of the mainstream.
Just give me my EA, Take-Two (Rockstar), Nintendo, Bungie and such. I'm more then content - My wallet on the other hand... Not so much.
i would see this as a direct result of apple (the iphone) lighting a fire under nintendo's collective ass
Ohh god no. Apple's collective ass can't put a dent into Nintendo's demographic.
Look, the iPod Touch/iPhone has games. So does the Zune HD. They're all three great multi-media devices but none will ever compare to something like that PSP for gaming. Touch controls alone detract from the actual game experience. The games on the App Store can be really great but again, there's no comparison to a real portable gaming system. A good example of this is iPhone's "Real Racing" vs PSP's Gran Turismo. HUGE difference. Yes, Gran Turismo definitely costs more but if you want a real portable gaming experience, you have to pay a bit more. In my opinion, it's completely worth it.
@tkaravou
I can't tell if your being sarcastic or not so I'll reply anyways.
Some people like buying devices that are used for one particular thing because they are tailored for doing that one thing well instead of sucking at everything. Yeah there are exceptions to the rule like the iPhone being a good cellphone and portable music/video player or the PS3 which is a great gaming device and one of the best Blu-Ray players you can get. But for the most part when it comes to handheld gaming nothing comes close to the PSP or DS on that front.
Try playing a PS1 or a N64 game on the iPhone? I rest my case...
PC's can play games but some people don't know the ins and out of a computer to keep their computer up with the hardware curve. I honestly thing it's good for the industry because more casual gamers can play too or people that would be too intimidated with PC hardware.
It's things like consoles and handhelds that helped the gaming industry grow to where it is today.
"Try playing a PS1 or a N64 game on the iPhone?"
Moving quickly past the point that you didn't ask a question, why would you try to play a PS1 or N64 game on the iPhone? As much as I loved R-Type Delta on the PS1, I have absolutely no wish to try playing it on an iPhone for the simple reason that it wasn't written for it. We don't need old games on new systems that were written for old systems, what we need are new games that were written for our news systems. It really doesn't matter which new system we are talking about.
Typical of Sony using hardware that's more expensive and difficult to develop for. I love my PSP 3000 (even though I don't use it as much as used to) but come on Sony this is gettin rediculous.
More expensive and difficult to develop for AND more powerful. The PS3's CBE chip won't be truly outdated for years - the graphics card on the other hand, is already rather dated, but there's no reason that an updated CBE couldn't be used in a future PS4.
But the question is what good is that if it takes developers 3+ years to get out of it what they want. I'm not going to lie I will be buying a PS3 Slim this Christmas but it really says something when multi-platform game devs say that the Xbox 360 is much easier to program and develop for than the PS3. Sony did the same thing with the Emotion Engine. I understand the importance of using new technology to move the industry but when Devs find it more cost efficient to work with what they know (Xbox 360s PPC hardware/Xbox 1's Pentium 3) than why not use that?
iPhone + Actual game controls = Print even more money.
Isn't the PSP2 indicative of how Sony products always are. PS3...Cell processor...supposedly more powerful than 360 but hella harder to develop for. Normal Sony affair.
Well, I buy Nintendo handheld for Nintendo games. There are just something about their games that no one seemed to be able to replicate on other handhelds.
I tend to find the comments against this article indicative of why I find games today so boring. There are so many people here advocating that games should be played in the same way as they have been since the 1970s, that joysticks and buttons are in some way mandatory to producing a "serious " game and that any gamer worth their salt wouldn't touch a system without them. They are not. If you insist on keeping the same controls and just uprating the graphics in each "generation" then you are doomed to keep playing the same games as you have been. I would rather give up playing games entirely than continue to keep playing the same variations of games.
No, the main point isn't that they don't want touch screen gaming...
But the fact that most of the controls that REQUIRE sum type of button press and analog control (whether physical or touchscreen)...it takes up 50% of the iPhone screen. So your gaming view is cut in half.
That's not good no matter how you look at it.
If they could make it to where you have full view and a very effective control system...then bring it. Until then...DS and PSP will reign supreme...
Well, indeed, that continues my point. Games don't need buttons, real or virtual. In much the same way as existing games developers have problems coming up with things to do with the Wiimote because it is not a joypad, so they seem to have trouble coming up with games for touchscreen devices that don't resort to the "tried and trusted" option of making the user press buttons. I absolutely agree that games that dedicate large expanses of screen space to virtual buttons are not the way forwards. As I have said in a number of comments already, what is necessary is imagination and there are enough examples of good games that don't need on-screen buttons to show that it can be done. Developers as well as gamers need to come out of their "comfort zone" in order to experience something new and interesting.
@Kelmon: Um, I don't know if you noticed yet, but DS already has a touchscreen - sure, resistive with stylus rather than capacitative, but that works better for precise gaming controls - and it's seen plenty of creative use over the last five years.
I think a large part of the problem with phone games is about what kind of games people want to play on their phones.I agree the input hardware limitations are overblown (there are plenty of DS games you can play entirely with touchscreen, many of which are better than anything that's released on iphone). People don't seem to want to play full-scale phone games for several other reasons:
- battery usage; if your game system batteries run out, whatever, you can't play games for a bit. If that's your phone battery, you're out of contact. Not such a problem if modern phones had batteries that comfortably lasted for three days or so. They don't.
- software price; full-length games cost money to develop and $5, or even $10, isn't going to work as a price point. Phone gamers aren't conditioned for a $30 price point.
- hardware price (the opposite); what's an iphone cost these days including the contract, still somewhere well north of $1,000? Sure, some parents are willing to pay that for their kids, but others aren't. Kids are a big part of the market for portable gaming.
Indeed, the DS does have a touchscreen and it can be used to great effect but I think it is fair to say that a lot of the games for the DS still rely on the D-Pad and buttons. That there are good games for the DS that can be played almost entirely with the stylus only not only shows that the D-Pad and buttons are not necessary (contrary to the opinion expressed in this article's comments) but that smartphones with only a touchscreen can certainly be competitive.
With respect to some of the other points, I agree that the smartphone isn't there yet and that battery life is an issue. However, I do not expect these to be issues for much longer, which is why I think Nintendo and Sony can only get one more generation of dedicated devices. What I do find odd is that you would consider price and development costs to be an "issue". The iPhone has shown itself to be tremendously democratising because anyone, pending Apple's rather capricious approval, can produce a game. You don't need to be a "development house" and you don't need to worry about publishing costs - anyone can do it. Some people are making a lot of money from doing this because the overheads are so low so I don't see the low average game prices being issue. Perhaps this will be a problem for the big development houses that do have high overheads already but I don't believe that these companies produce any better games than the rest of us.
Finally, the beauty of the iPhone platform is the backup that it has from the iPod Touch for those people who want access to the games but don't want the cost of the monthly contract. I imagine that Microsoft will be in the same position if it ever produces a Zune Smartphone. Again, the iPod Touch is hardly what you would call a dedicated gaming device, although I will concede that it has quite a lot in common with at least the PSP in terms of its capabilities, but it does enable you to "upgrade" to the full iPhone later when you want to and you can bring along all your games/applications.
I'd just like to note that I don't want these comments to necessarily be a trumpeting for the Apple iPhone. Rather, I use this as an example of what can be done with a smartphone platform to compete with Sony and Nintendo to the point where I do not see a dedicated gaming device to be a viable option in the future. Device convergence is what the customer wants and it is what they are getting right now.
Well, I dont' want to get into what type of gaming is meant for which device and whats better, not the point of the engadget post. Though I will say this: For games that cost $30+ bucks, I'd want a dedicated gaming platform that I know will handle it well. For casual gaming on $5 games, the touch-based quickie games (like Tower games) on iPHones/Zunes are great. Doesn't need dedicated gaming hardware. And there are huge markets for both.
Now, the Tegra 2 would be great for the DS2. Though, I kind of like the 2D gaming on the DS, don't care for much 3D stuff. But that is only my preference. DS2 is simple: Have the screens slightly larger (not XL size), perhaps widescreen it a bit, a bit higher resolution, offer touch on both screens, and the Tegra 2. More built-in storage and SDXC slot. My only concern with Tegra is having a good battery life. Will it compare to the current DSi or DSLite?
PSP2- I wonder if they could figure out someway to put a low-power, pared down Cell Processor in it. I doubt it, so the only thing I wonder about is if they will stick with UMD or go with downloads only? Also, Sony should really think about putting a second stick on it. Seems every gamer wants it.
Yeah, because Professor Layton and Hotel Dusk needed alot of polygon-pushing power to be fun.
Can I please just have dual analog sticks on a portable gaming device?! Though faster processors are certainly nice, I'll never be able to fully enjoy (at least to my preferences) some on-the-go Halo/Call of Duty/other FPS action with the current control options.
I would have thought that Sony learned their lesson with the Ps3. For all the hype about the cell processor, their really isn't a noticeable difference between the graphics on Ps3 and the 360. MAYBE if you had them side by side you MIGHT be able to see it, but really when it comes down to it nothing to be concerned about. So they develop a system that has a negligible graphics advantage that takes longer to get out, more expensive to make, and more difficult to program for...really? Sony really has fallen from its glory days. I wish they would be less concerned about difficult to program for graphics that make no difference and worry more about good games.
Thouch screen gaming on the iPhone and DS aren't always equally comparable to each other.
Specifically, the DS is able to dedicate it's touch screen to input and it's upper screen to output. The iPhone must dedicate one screen to both input and output, that can make a huge difference in whether or not touch control is suitable to a specific title.
I'd be seriously impressed of a platformer like Yoshi's Island DS would even be remotely possible on a system with no buttons.