Sony PSP vs Nintendo DS

[Ending]

Originally Posted by Sid_Burn

Yes... PSP will probably defeat the Big N in terms of graphics...

Not only there, since they already have a large group of game-makers. More = Bigger selection = More creativity required.

[El Diablo]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

Not only there, since they already have a large group of game-makers. More = Bigger selection = More creativity required.

I don't understand that reasoning. More games does NOT = more creativity. Look at how many clones of games have appeared over the years. Also, as for Nintendo rehashing games, i'd choose a rehashed Nintendo game than an utterly dire clone. Anybody remember Croc on the ps1?

[chrno]

So far so good it seems that Sony managed to pull out their stops in producing their first portable. I like it so far. And it's big and sleek. Not to mention a bigger screen.

"Oh how we've longed for that!"

The NDS isn't so bad either. Going back to their old roots like the old Gamewatch pocket games. GBA SP has a similar design. And again the screen is small. But now they give you 2 small screens. Oh and a stylus. This could be promising on Nintendo's end. Apparently Nintendo is up to something that Sony hasn't looked. Either that or we don't know all the INs and OUTs of the PSP yet. I'm almost sure the PSP is going to have some wireless capability.

But I wonder who's got the most power in their machine?
But I'm sure its not going to be about power but what you can do with it.

I'm definitely going to keep a watch on these 2. I may not run out and buy it at first glance. But I am smitten over the PSP's design.

[nojevo]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

Not only there, since they already have a large group of game-makers. More = Bigger selection = More creativity required.

I really doubt the psp will bring in more creative energy into the game relased for the platform. Only advantage I see is that it uses the umd which hold 1.8 gigs of data and its capable of ps2 graphics. The nds is the developer's system as it has two screens and one of them is touch sensitive which enables developers to create new titles that can use these features. Therefore the ds is where more creativity is required, not the psp.

[Ending]

The reasoning is that if there is a lot of developers, there will be a lot of competition, and thus they are forced to be creative if they want their games to sell. Of course, you can ask has this happened with PS1 or 2, but they are the most popular consoles of today, don't you agree?

[wnkryo]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

The reasoning is that if there is a lot of developers, there will be a lot of competition, and thus they are forced to be creative if they want their games to sell. Of course, you can ask has this happened with PS1 or 2, but they are the most popular consoles of today, don't you agree?

Great answer. I was going to post the exsact same explanation as you just gave

[mantidor]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

The reasoning is that if there is a lot of developers, there will be a lot of competition, and thus they are forced to be creative if they want their games to sell. Of course, you can ask has this happened with PS1 or 2, but they are the most popular consoles of today, don't you agree?

is not that great answer actually. is a stupid statement and you explain the reason for being stupid yourself "this hasn't happened with the ps1 and ps2" and then you said they are the most popular, wich makes your whole post even more dumb, it has nothing to do with originalty anymore.

The original is and has always been Nintendo. Every platformer is based after the firsts mario games. Basically every 3d game was molded after mario 64. Developers just wait for nintendo's ideas, to stole them later.

[nojevo]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

The reasoning is that if there is a lot of developers, there will be a lot of competition, and thus they are forced to be creative if they want their games to sell. Of course, you can ask has this happened with PS1 or 2, but they are the most popular consoles of today, don't you agree?

Having more competion does not force a developer to be more creative. People tend to buy what is familiar. If its something creative and new, they might get intimidated and avoid it. What developers are doing to cash in is to make a game that the public wants and try to make it look and play better than the competition. There are a few games that are new and fresh that are hits but there are other than are really good but just overlooked by the public. If you look at all the games released for the ps and the ps2, they are all clones of each other.

[Sanjuronord]

Originally Posted by mantidor

is not that great answer actually. is a stupid statement and you explain the reason for being stupid yourself "this hasn't happened with the ps1 and ps2" and then you said they are the most popular, wich makes your whole post even more dumb, it has nothing to do with originalty anymore.

The original is and has always been Nintendo. Every platformer is based after the firsts mario games. Basically every 3d game was molded after mario 64. Developers just wait for nintendo's ideas, to stole them later.

Exactly. You can't beat Nintendo on creativity. Look at most of the games going to PSP so far, they're just ports really. They'll sell like crazy, but there is little real originality going on there (MGA being the one exception but that could go either way really, fans of MGS may not go for the new gameplay). Playstation sells their games with flashy graphics and explosions (or beating up hookers...thank you gta3 ) which isn't to say they're all bad, there are some great games that come out of that.

[Night]

i would be after the DS for the following reasons.

sure it's great for the PSP to have all that processing power, and to make it look great, but let's be serious about the ports.
would you rather pay $100 to play grand turismo 4 on the PSP or the PS2
only port i'd ever buy would be a GTA game.
and that's my line of thought of what the majority of the PSP games would be like.
is there really going to be any games that would make me go wow. especially when i see the PSP and it just seems like a normal gameboy pocket, only more beefier.

i would like to buy the DS because it's definitely different, mind you they gotta work a bit on the looks of the thing to make it more 'BMWish'

the 2 screens and the touchscreen would rock, i say this because, can you imagine playing something like final fantasy and you could easily just use the touch screen to hurry up and select all your gfs and mana and stuff, that's be pretty awesome rather than constantly pressing buttons.
i'd love to play zelda with the touchscreen as my assistant too.
that's all i can think of about the touchpad at the moment, too sleepy haha.

i'm pretty much sick of playing games that only look better. so i'd definitely want something different. this from a person that has been playing games since the atari2600.

note: i'm a sony fanboy but in this case, the possibilities for the DS with new gaming experiences just make me go wow

we also know that nintendo knows how to make games

[Ending]

is not that great answer actually. is a stupid statement and you explain the reason for being stupid yourself "this hasn't happened with the ps1 and ps2" and then you said they are the most popular, wich makes your whole post even more dumb, it has nothing to do with originalty anymore.

First of all, Mantidor, if you want to sound even half-way intelligent, forget using mocking words like "stupid" or "dumb." Obviously, you're just a child with too many hormones, so please bugger off and let adults talk.

Same applies to you, Sanjuronord.

@ Nojevo

How it does not force them to be more creative? You know, what you said after that just threw all modern economics to rubbish bin, and I have read them enough to know which one to believe. "--If its something creative and new they might get intimidated and avoid it.--" Heh, what are we talking about then? If people don't want new and creative games, then PSP will be a sure-hit cash-magnet anyway, even if there weren't any "new and creative" games.

[mantidor]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

First of all, Mantidor, if you want to sound even half-way intelligent, forget using mocking words like "stupid" or "dumb." Obviously, you're just a child with too many hormones, so please bugger off and let adults talk.

Same applies to you, Sanjuronord.

@ Nojevo

How it does not force them to be more creative? You know, what you said after that just threw all modern economics to rubbish bin, and I have read them enough to know which one to believe. "--If its something creative and new they might get intimidated and avoid it.--" Heh, what are we talking about then? If people don't want new and creative games, then PSP will be a sure-hit cash-magnet anyway, even if there weren't any "new and creative" games.

Im sorry, I supposed that instead of "stupid" and "dumb" I should've used "contradictory" and "incongruent", I was just symplifying things, specially for you, mainly since my goal in this forums is to "pretend" im intelligent just like you are.

You make laugh so hard mr. "adult person", instead of explaining without flaming or attacking why you don't agree with me you just try to insult me in a very pathetic way, and then you attack Sanjuronord who didn't even mention you, suuure, you're way too mature for us

nevertheless I agree with some of the things you said about Nojevo's post. In theory developers should be more creative if there is more competition, but as you already said, we haven't seen this in sony's consoles. The best part of your post is that you agree with me that the PSP is everything but original.

[Ending]

Don't worry, kiddo; I have already notified the admins about this. They'll deal with it as they see fit.

[nojevo]

Wirhe,

I just don't understand why you say that having more competition forces developers to create more creative content. Just look at all the ps2 titles out there and tell me which one of them are creative and sells well. They are few title that could be clasified as creative and if they are, less than half of them sells well. Take the game Ico as an example. The critics loved the game and yet it was overlooked by consumers. Sega's Dreamcast had the most cretive titles such as Jet grind Radio and Space Channel 5 and the system died. Developers wants to play it safe so they just copy what is proven succesful and hopefully they will hit the jackpot. Nintendo is the only company right now who are taking the risk to develop something creative and original. The ds is the system that will bring in more creative and original content. The psp will just be a novelty but a cashcow just becuase it carries Sony's brand. There will be a couple of titles worth picking up, but the rest will either be ports or bad copy of other games. I'm interested in both systems, but I think Nintendo has the better system. This doesn't mean that it will be succesfull.

[Sanjuronord]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

Same applies to you, Sanjuronord.

First off, I don't believe I've made any personal attacks at you but if I have I apologize. When I said "Exactly" I was referring to his views on creativity in the game market. Creativity rarely sells in gaming, it's a risky choice because if a game flops it's very hard on the developers. That's why you see so many sequels in the gaming industry rather than new content. Take the gta3 series, they're about to come out with their third game in that series (gta3 and street fighter 2 should really work on their numbering) with the same graphic look and same game play. GTA3 was pretty much the console seller for ps2, now gamecube on the other hand had Mario Sunshine, that was a creative choice for the mario franchise and it sucked (big time). To put it in modern economics, few companies are willing to put out a risky creative game when they know a simple platformer or fps is pretty much guaranteed to make x amount of money. Two most recent creative games on the gamecube i can think of are Billy Hatcher and the Giant Egg and Viewtiful Joe. The latter did great and the former did not so good if memory serves me here.
You could also look at it this way. Nintendo is an underdog to Sony in the console gaming world and from that position they have to be creative to keep up. Just doing okay or porting games from other consoles isn't going to keep them afloat. They need people to look at their games and think, "oh i haven't seen anything like this on xbox or ps2, maybe i should get a gamecube".

[Sanjuronord]

Originally Posted by nojevo

Take the game Ico as an example. The critics loved the game and yet it was overlooked by consumers. Sega's Dreamcast had the most cretive titles such as Jet grind Radio and Space Channel 5 and the system died.

*cough*Shenmue*cough* Actually Sega wants to put out the rest of the shenmue series but the first two games were so expensive to make and sold much less than they expected that they're afraid to put out the game. Too many people were afraid to give the game a shot when it was out or just didn't take to the games mechanics which were very original. A great example of creativity not selling, despite being a great game.

They're actually supposed to be coming out with a sequel to Ico which was actually a very good game despite not doing so hot. They'll probably put it out on the greatest hits collection prior to the sequel to spark some interest in the series.

[wnkryo]

Originally Posted by Sanjuronord

*cough*Shenmue*cough* Actually Sega wants to put out the rest of the shenmue series but the first two games were so expensive to make and sold much less than they expected that they're afraid to put out the game. Too many people were afraid to give the game a shot when it was out or just didn't take to the games mechanics which were very original. A great example of creativity not selling, despite being a great game.

They're actually supposed to be coming out with a sequel to Ico which was actually a very good game despite not doing so hot. They'll probably put it out on the greatest hits collection prior to the sequel to spark some interest in the series.

I'm the only one that liked shenmu?

[Ending]

@ Nojevo

My line of thought here is this:

There is an empty market when a new console is published. Let's guess that it's the next Nintendo 1.000.000-Bit console and that it's selling like crazy. First a few companies will breach the market barriers and begin building games. They sell well because there is little competition and consumers want to use their brand new, shining consoles. These companies just need to do adequate games to survive in the market.

Okay, the console matures, new companies enter to the market, and people are starting to expect more. Do not forget that gaming industry depends pretty much of creativity, and as such should be viewed through the "creativity lens" as proved in Johnson & Scholes' "Exploring Corporate Strategy." What I am saying here is that once the competitive pressure rises in a market that depends of creativity and market specialization, it forces the companies to hone these skills if they wish to stay-in-business. Creativity in this case just means "making better games", or games that people want. That's what we were discussing; which system will more likely have games we want. If you read between the lines now, you'll know that the two previously mentioned do not even need to match -if the game is what we want, but not creative, does it matter? If it is creative and doesn't sell, the company suffers and will eventually change their marketing line or leave the market. Either way, having a lot of companies under their wing will benefit Sony more than Nintendo, who are forced to depend on a few brands to sell (like their Metroid and Mario -serie).

Thus I believe that Sony has more potential, even though it is a new market for them. They have PS2 backing them up, and the benefits of a big corporation. However, it is the final product and marketing that will determine which one gets the better hand of the market.

You could also look at it this way. Nintendo is an underdog to Sony in the console gaming world and from that position they have to be creative to keep up. Just doing okay or porting games from other consoles isn't going to keep them afloat. They need people to look at their games and think, "oh i haven't seen anything like this on xbox or ps2, maybe i should get a gamecube".

Yes, but they also are in weaker position when it comes to the most important aspect: money. IIRC, during the time of N64, it has been Game Boy that has been their major source of income. This was, what?; 2-3 year period? And during this time PSX came a huge success for Sony, who was a new entrant at the market. Even today it gives them a strong competitive advantage. IMO, now that they have money and reputation behind them, they should move-in to give the killing blow to one of their losing competitors: Nintendo. I think, by these signs, that if Sony manages to breach the handheld market, and Nintendo's next console is a flop, like it was with Sega, we will soon see BOTH Sega and Nintendo as minor game-making companies in the market.

[mantidor]

Originally Posted by Wirhe

@ Nojevo

My line of thought here is this:

There is an empty market when a new console is published. Let's guess that it's the next Nintendo 1.000.000-Bit console and that it's selling like crazy. First a few companies will breach the market barriers and begin building games. They sell well because there is little competition and consumers want to use their brand new, shining consoles. These companies just need to do adequate games to survive in the market.

Okay, the console matures, new companies enter to the market, and people are starting to expect more. Do not forget that gaming industry depends pretty much of creativity, and as such should be viewed through the "creativity lens" as proved in Johnson & Scholes' "Exploring Corporate Strategy." What I am saying here is that once the competitive pressure rises in a market that depends of creativity and market specialization, it forces the companies to hone these skills if they wish to stay-in-business. Creativity in this case just means "making better games", or games that people want. That's what we were discussing; which system will more likely have games we want. If you read between the lines now, you'll know that the two previously mentioned do not even need to match -if the game is what we want, but not creative, does it matter? If it is creative and doesn't sell, the company suffers and will eventually change their marketing line or leave the market. Either way, having a lot of companies under their wing will benefit Sony more than Nintendo, who are forced to depend on a few brands to sell (like their Metroid and Mario -serie).

Thus I believe that Sony has more potential, even though it is a new market for them. They have PS2 backing them up, and the benefits of a big corporation. However, it is the final product and marketing that will determine which one gets the better hand of the market.


Yes, but they also are in weaker position when it comes to the most important aspect: money. IIRC, during the time of N64, it has been Game Boy that has been their major source of income. This was, what?; 2-3 year period? And during this time PSX came a huge success for Sony, who was a new entrant at the market. Even today it gives them a strong competitive advantage. IMO, now that they have money and reputation behind them, they should move-in to give the killing blow to one of their losing competitors: Nintendo. I think, by these signs, that if Sony manages to breach the handheld market, and Nintendo's next console is a flop, like it was with Sega, we will soon see BOTH Sega and Nintendo as minor game-making companies in the market.

I have to disagree with some of the things you just stated.

You are right about the creativity and competition part, but then again, thats not whats happening! games that sell well are rehashs from their older counterparts but just with improved graphics.

This is how I see it: The change between the SNES-GENESIS era and the N64-PS era was huge, everyone was shock at the way games had evolved, because the leap from 2D to 3D is enourmous, so the whole industry thought that was the way to go, improving graphics, and it has work until now, but it wont last forever. The transition from N64-PS to PS2-GC-XBOX wasn't as impresive, and IMO the next one is not going to be impresive at all. Maybe hardcore gamers are going to debate endlessly about polygon counts and textures and realistic graphics, but the average gamer is going to think "that looks slightly better, should I buy this new console? I don't think so". Nintendo is looking forward to this situation and therefore has started to make innovations in gameplay with the DS, Sony is following the usual old path of inflating specs.

And Nintendo is not that weak financially. Sure there is no point comparing them to giant corporations like Sony and Microsoft, but they did extremly well in the good old times of the NES, so they have enough financial support. Besides they are the only ones making profits from their consoles, while Microsoft and Sony loose money on every console they sell. Of course they can afford to do it while Nintendo probably not, they have financial support but no that much.

one more thing a little , if you are going to start a personal war on me accusing me with the mods, (Honestly don't you think thats a little inmature?) do it through PMs. If the thread go offtopic we'll both get a nice ban.

[outlaw55]

Originally Posted by Iron Monkey

My fanboy alert is tingling...

dumb fuck alert tinging