From
GAF:
Quote:The online import shop NCS is reporting than a new handheld is coming out soon: The Game Theory Admiral.
The Game Theory Admirial, according to the report, is from an Asian manufacturer called "Mystery", and is a portable Famicom clone that accepts Japanese carts. It will be compatible with American and European carts once an adapter is made available. At $53 US, it's definitely the right price, but how is the quality? We're not sure as of yet. We'll look for more onfo on this and report back when we can.
If you're interested in the Game Theory Admiral, check out the link here, which also includes a photo of the unit.
Source: NCS
Posted by pizzicato on 8.8.2003
Holy crap on a crap-cracker does this look awesome!!!!
http://www.ncsx.org/2003/ncs080403/ncs0804th.htm
Quote:An Asian manufacturer named "Mystery" has started offering a portable Nintendo Famicom clone which accepts Japanese cartridges. The promotional flyer touts future compatibility with USA and European NES cartridges once an adapter is made available for distribution. Pricing is tentative at US$53 - Email inquiries welcome. The features of the Game Theory Admiral include:
1- Built-in 2" backlit TFT screen.
2- Composite output to TV via supplied AV cable.
3- NTSC or PAL version available. The PAL version is colored blue, the NTSC version is pink. No, we didn't decide the color schemes.
4- Operates on 3 AA batteries.
Just look at this totally rad, super-innovative device! I want one
NOW!
This "handhelf" will be annihilated as soon as it's hits the market, if it even exists.
How could you not want a handhelf called the Game Theory Admiral??!! You're nuts if you don't want it!
Yeah, doesn't everyone love those cheap Asian pirated systems?
Dude, you're getting a Game Theory Admiral! It's got cool new games like "The Legend of Soltar"! It even cures all diseases! I kicked my zits to the curb!
Why would anyone buy that thing? It isn't even a pirated Super Famicom!
That thing is going to look really goofy with a huge NES catridge sticking out of it.
Uhh... you DO remember that Famicom carts are between a third and a quarter the size of NES carts, right?
Quote:The promotional flyer touts future compatibility with USA and European NES cartridges once an adapter is made available for distribution.
That's what I'm talking about, you blockhead!!
Sure, but given where this thing is being released, most people with one won't exactly have to worry about how big NES carts are...
So... it's another Game Ax.
What I find curious is how the console industry can support three competeing mega-companies like X-Box, Sony and GC...yet the handheld industry has never been able to support anything more than Game Boy for very long. I don't feel that the new Sony handheld will be much competition either.
The Gameboy has been pretty much alone because there haven't been any worthy competitors in the handheld market. Let's take a look at all of the Gameboy's competition, and why they failed.
Game Gear: Better graphics, plenty of good games, but a battery life of about fifteen minutes (slight exaggeration). It ate six AA's in a very short amount of time.
Turbo Express: A portable Turbo Grafx 16. It was too expensive, was from a company that wasn't nearly as popular as Nintendo, and sucked batteries like the Game Gear.
Atari Lynx: Crap all around. There were very few decent games available for the system, and it had a very short battery life.
Nomad: A portable Genesis which failed for the same reason the above three handhelds failed: a piss-poor battery life. Then there's the fact that there weren't really any new Genesis games coming out at the time the Nomad came out.
Game.com: Do I even need to comment on this? It was a crappy black&white portable from Tiger Electronics.
Neo Geo Pocket/Pocket Color: A good handheld with some good games, better graphics than the Gameboy, and a great battery life. Unfortunately SNK is only popular amongst "hardcore" gamers, so it died.
Do you now see why the Gameboy is still number on in the industry? Either the competiting handhelds had terrible battery lives and/or were released by unpopular companies. If the PSP has a decent battery life and is cheap enough, there is a very good chance that it could take the number one spot away from Nintendo in the handheld market.
But you know, this debate is useless until we find out more about the PSP.
Don't forget the Wonderswan and the Wonderswan Crystal. I'm not really sure why they failed, they did have several Final Fantasy games.
There was also the Wonderswan Color, which is between the two. The two FF ports were to that one actually.
To be honest, it's the only one that ever even made a dent. It stood there for a while, and had a GREAT launch, but it just faded away. The system was good. It had big name games. It had a great launch. It failed miserably... Nintendo's handheld is just too strong it seems, even for huge brand names to make an impact.
Oh yeah, I totally forgot about the Wonderswan.
The Wonderswan was the Gameboy's biggest competitor in Japan, but it was from Bandai and the system wasn't too much more powerful than the GBC. Then of course the GBA came out and that really smacked it in the face. It did have Final Fantasy, but that was about it, and they weren't even new FF games. Nintendo had so many more big titles than Bandai did, who never really had a chance to beat Nintendo. Another example of a small company never having a chance.
Bandai can't really be called a small company. Not MASSIVE like some megaconglomerates, but big at any rate.
The Wonderswan Color was actually SNES level graphics (though the sound was still GBC level) and this shows from, well, Final Fantasy Origins which is a straight graphics port (except for the screen size increase) of the WSC remakes. The Wonderswan Crystal was even more powerful and finally got some decent sound like the GBA, but by then it was too late.
They are most certainly very small compared to Nintendo, which I assumed you would understand when I made that comment.
I never played one before (since it was never released here) and I could have sworn that it was just at the GBC level, but you're right it was closer to the SNES.
Lynx was advertised as the first 16-bit portable (but I don't know if its a true 16-bit of fake 16-bit like Turbografx/Express is)... but it sucked batteries terribly, yes, just like the Game Gear. Its main problem was that it was made by Atari... who by then was essentially dead.
And the Game.com was the first online handheld... but yes, it was not too good and had a terrible quality screen.
Oh, and Sega wasn't that far behind Nintendo... company size didn't bring that down, battery life did. The Turbo Express and Lynx were doomed from the start of course because those companies never had a chance...
So yes, no handheld provided really strong competition. That is absolutely true. And it is why Nintendo has the whole market. And its also why competition in the future will have to do quite well to topple the Game Boy. :)
Actually it would be very easy for someone like Sony or MS to make a handheld that would be tough competition for the Gameboy, it's just that everyone so far has done something wrong, by choice or not. All of the big companies released handhelds with terrible battery usage, and the ones with great battery usage were by small companies (compared to Nintendo).
Very easy? No way. Not with Nintendo's full power behind it and the long history of success of the Game Boy.
History doesn't mean much. Atari used to be king of video game land, then Nintendo, and now Sony. Things change all of the time, and you're foolish to think that not even Sony could be serious competition for the Gameboy just because of how popular the Gameboy has been for the past decade or so. As I pointed out above, there were never any handhelds that stood a chance against the Gameboy because of faults of the handhelds themselves, not neccesarily because Nintendo is the "bizzy-bizzom".
Ah, but those all collapsed AFTER they either faltered or started to fade... while in the handheld market Nintendo is doing at least as well if not better than it ever has. KEY, KEY difference there.
That didn't make any sense. None of those handhelds had any chance of being real competition for Nintendo because of the points I mentioned.
And I agreed with you.
I just think that it'll be a lot harder than you expect for Sony to become number one in the portable market. Sure, this could be the toughest competition for the GB yet... but it is now, and will still be when the PSP comes out, a successful, current console. Which is a critical difference from every other example you've come up with, for sure.
I already explained why your reasoning is flawed, so I won't repeat myself. Let's just wait until the PSP comes out.
No, you just spouted off stupid stuff about how Sony is so great and so innovative and so on top of everything and will make great hardware (despite all evidence to the contrary) and will have it with a great price AND great battery life (something that me and MANY others here find an insane idea) and with lots of games and will quickly get over half the market.
I'd be surprised if ONE of those things comes true.
Now... I'd expect that kind of thing from a Sony fanboy, but from YOU? Having to defend Nintendo to OB1? Insane! You should know better!
You see, the difference between me and you is that I'm not a blind fanboy. Nintendo is my favorite gaming company but I'm not such a biased moron that I think they're invincible or anything like that. I never once said that Sony is innovative, just that they know what they're doing! If they didn't know what they were doing than they wouldn't be way ahead of Nintendo and MS in the console business.
You people are extremely naive if you think that Sony doesn't know what they're doing with the PSP. This isn't some little company like Bandai or Tiger here. This is Sony, the leader of handheld electronics devices! They know that if the unit is too expensive and has a poor battery life that it's going to fail, so they're not going let that happen.
Sometime within the next nine months or so we're going to get all of the details on the PSP, and when that time comes you will see that I'm right, and I will certainly rub it in your face for the next year or so. Just wait and see.
Yes, lets. We'll see this bizarre faith you have in Sony doing everything right will not come to pass... I mean, its not like their hardware has ever been all that great! They won purely based on luck, nothing else... luck and perfect timing. It had nothing to do with great technology or anything, and I don't see why I should think they will make a handheld that good. I see no evidence that they can.
Luck??!! They have been able to dominate the entire console gaming industry (for the past six years now) based soley on luck?? Are you insane??!
Yes. No.
Sony decided to make a console once Nintendo killed the SNES PSX add-on. This timeframe was luckily for Sony the PERFECT one. If it'd been a few years earlier it would've been another 3DO. Remember, at its release the $700 3DO was top of the line... and if it'd been a few years later other consoles would have had time to grow up a lot of strength. So they had luck on their side... and some good planning, for releasing it right at the weakest point in time for all the other console manufacturers... some strategy, with a big helping of luck.
Then of course they had the great luck to have Nintendo make a cart-based console, and the big Japanese manufacturers fell onto their lap. More luck.
And from there... the hardware quality didn't matter, it was POPULAR so that was irrelevant. The PS2 isn't exactly the best hardware design either, but it won because of name recognition.
If the PSP wins, it'll be based on name recognition of the PS name and average hardware, not good hardware that takes over the handheld industry, that's for sure.
But as I said before, Nintendo has a great chance of lasting for a while just based on how well people know the Game Boy brand and how many great games are and will be still coming out for it, and how most parents won't exactly want to buy their kids a new $200 handheld when they already have a Game Boy... so they go for a older market -- one that just buys fewer handheld games. Not great for Sony to "take over the industry".
Good Lord, this is something I'd expect to hear from one of those idiotic Nintendo fanboys at the ign boards, but not from you!
Sony is at the top because they're doing right what Nintendo is doing wrong. Nintendo has fixed most of the problems from the N64 days, but they're still behind for a reason, and it is most certainly not just because of Sony's "luck". Nintendo charges too much for licensing fees, their marketing is crap so few people buy their consoles, third-party games sell terribly on the Gamecube because the only people that bought GC's were serious Nintendo fans who only buy Nintendo games, and they still can't change their image. Sony looked at everything that Nintendo did and tried to fix those things to make them more attractive to third-parties. It is very stupid to think that the only reason for Sony's success is luck. You can't get be that lucky for so long.
Luck? I suppose luck played a fairly large role for Sony. What with the Saturn launching early, and the N64 launching late. It did put them in a perfect pouncing position to take the #1 spot.
Though it was their killer marketting that allowed them to get to the #1 spot in the end. Strategic price drops (just before the N64 launch), announcing a platinum range (I believe just before the N64's first price drop), solid and funny commercial time, not to mention making an image for themselves that appealed to everyone, even adults.
Luck let them put their foot in the door, it was up to Sony to muscle their way in, though.
Of course, the same could be applied to the PSP's chances of dominating the handheld market. Nintendo released an excellent handheld (GBA) a couple of years ago. Sony plan to release their handheld which, let's face it, sounds pretty incredible. Which will surely promp Nintendo to start working on THEIR next handheld.
Now, with many developers already showing interest in the PSP (not to mention Sony's own internal developers who have really found their feet, quality wise this generation (imagine if a handheld Gran Turismo, or SOCOM, or whatever launches with this machine..), IF Sony somehow allow it to sport a long battery life, with their marketting, and being released some time before Nintendo can get their next handheld out, then it is a definate threat to Nintendo's reign. Though it will definately be hard. Probably more akin to Microsoft's long-term plans of toppling Sony from the #1 spot in the console market.
Sorry, I was called here, and Sony did not take the industry by luck. Sony took the indsurty because it was smart, savvy and didn't make a bunch of stupid mistakes like Nintendo and Sega did. Those same things you cited as luck were actual decisions at one point. Luck had nothing to do with it. Every move was calculated and they left nothing to chance. They saw an opening and exploited it, pure and simple.
Nintendo could have done the same thing, blown Sony out of the water and saved themselves the embarassment of having their head handed to them, but they continue to do many of the same mistakes they did before. The optical format should have been adopted with the N64, the marketing should have been ratcheted up and third party support should have been courted then. And many people who weren't aware of the Gamecube before....*sigh* well, Nintendo still makes awesome games, which keeps them somewhat afloat, and obviously the Game Boy is going to keep them there, but it's only a matter of time before Sony and MS wise up and go where Nintendo is making their money.
Hey LS returns! Even though it's because I asked you to, it's still great see you post every once in a great while. :D
It was luck and good marketing... but luck most of all.
What luck? Sony didn't choose by choice to release their console when they did. That happened that way because it just happened that by the time their system was ready for launch after they started working on it once being dumped by Nintendo the strength of the competition was probably at its weakest point since 1984...
It was Sony's great luck, and not great strategy, that Nintendo AND Sega had BOTH just messed up really badly right around the time they came out with their system! If either Nintendo or Sega had had their act together it never would have happened like it did... but neither one did, so they were there and ready to exploit the other's troubles.
It wasn't Sony's great strategists that got Sega to make the Sega CD, 32X, and Saturn in quick succession, all flawed in the eyes of the public, destroying their credibility... it wasn't Sony's brilliant engineers who designed the N64 to use carts... no, that was just stupid moves from the competition that they were all too happy to exploit.
Marketing? Sure, that helped a lot, and Sony certainly did a good job of selling their system. But they were selling it to a public ready for change... which wasn't a fact of their design, for sure.
So yes, I would say that Sony got leadership of the industry through luck.
Call it stupid moves from the competition and good advertising if it makes you happy, though.
And it had absolutely nothing to do with great hardware design.
With the PSX it most certainly did. Compared to the N64 and Saturn the PSX was a developer's dream come true, being as how it was so easy to develop for. But Sony's strength doesn't lie in hardware, it lies in marketing and public relations. The PlayStation might have had more help because of Nintendo and Sega's mistake, but the reason why Sony did so well (and still does so well) is because they brought gaming into the mainstream, they got more casual gamers into gaming than anyone had done before by making video games seem cool. Before that gaming was always just a nerdy passtime that kids like me would play when we got home from school, but Sony was able to take gaming and turn it into something cool, something very acceptable to the mass market. The reason why Nintendo is struggling behind Sony and MS is because in most people's eyes, the Gamecube is just a toy for little kids. It's unfortunate but true, and Nintendo really needs to change that image with the N5 if they plan on living through another generation of consoles.
Great hardware? Only when in comparison to the N64 and PSX... when compared to most anything else, no way. That just goes to prove even more how they were lucky to hit the market at the right time...
Oh, and Sega did the 'popular cool' thing years earlier to great success, so it was hardly an innovative idea. They just succeeded better than Sega at it, over a longer period of time.
But yes, public perception of the Cube definitely hurts it a lot. I don't know what Nintendo can do... 'mature' games certainly don't help as we learned on the Cube. I guess they shouldn't make it purple and look like a toy... that's about all I can think of.
Quote:Great hardware? Only when in comparison to the N64 and PSX... when compared to most anything else, no way. That just goes to prove even more how they were lucky to hit the market at the right time...
Wait--what?? What the hell was
that supposed to mean?! Make some sense, man!!
Sega did the cool thing but they didn't attract a huge mainstream audience like Sony did. Sega's thing was just cool amongst the gaming crowd, not everyone else. Big difference there. And who's talking about innovation? I'm just saying that Sony knows how to be popular, which is precisely why they're on top right now.
Quote:It was Sony's great luck, and not great strategy, that Nintendo AND Sega had BOTH just messed up really badly right around the time they came out with their system! If either Nintendo or Sega had had their act together it never would have happened like it did... but neither one did, so they were there and ready to exploit the other's troubles.
See the thing is, neither of them DID mess up really badly. Had Sony not entered the fray with a machine that did everything right (CD based format that was easy to develope for), no-one really would have said that the N64 fucked up for using the cartridge, and no one would have said that the Saturn fucked up by being difficult to program for, as both would have been massivly successful.
Quote:It wasn't Sony's great strategists that got Sega to make the Sega CD, 32X, and Saturn in quick succession, all flawed in the eyes of the public, destroying their credibility... it wasn't Sony's brilliant engineers who designed the N64 to use carts... no, that was just stupid moves from the competition that they were all too happy to exploit.
Exactly, Sony were given an opportunity, and they exploited it fully. Through brilliant marketting and developer relations.
Quote:So yes, I would say that Sony got leadership of the industry through luck.
A little luck, and great skill.
Quote:Call it stupid moves from the competition and good advertising if it makes you happy, though.
Stupid moves from the competition can only take you so far. Look at this generation. The PS2 was plagued with problems, yet Sony have still come out stronger than ever. You would think Microsoft would have surely been able to come through with sheer luck based soley on the stupid moves on behalf of Sony
Quote:And it had absolutely nothing to do with great hardware design.
Sure it did. Why do you think Sony earned developer favoritism over the Saturn early on, despite selling neck and neck with it?