Sony announces PSP's battery life...

[Great Rumbler]

Sony announced new tidbits of the PlayStation Portable PSP system. It is confirmed that the machine will have four face buttons (triangle, circle, cross and square), a digital directional pad, one analog stick, two should buttons (L and R), Start and Select. Connectivity is a key feature to PSP, the machine accepts the following connections through its USB port: PSP to PS2, PSP to PSP, PSP to PC. The machine will come with rechargeable battery which expected to last for 3 - 6 hours like other high-end devices. The Universal Media Disc will have security feature to prevent piracy; and the 3D power will be more akin to PS2 instead of PSone. Developers around the world will soon receive a PSP emulator for development, and actual hardware development kit will be shipping this winter.

3-6 hours?! AHAHAHAHAHA!! That must really want to lose badly, that's a horrible battery life!

The Magic Box

[A Black Falcon]

Hahahaha... take that! I KNEW that Sony wouldn't be able to do decent battery life with that thing... :D

[OB1]

Uh... guys? That's 3-6 hours with a rechargeable battery. That's actually very good for such a system! Do you ever play a game for more than 3 hours at a time? The reason why the Gamegear failed was because you had to spend a fortune on batteries.

Rechargeable = Free, in case you didn't know.

[The Former DMiller]

I agree with OB1. Even though the battery life isn't close to that of the GBA SP, it's still rechargable. I think Game Gear took something like 6 batteries or some unbearable number like that and it only lasted 3 hours or so. However, this still could be a factor since the life will probably be at the low end of that estimate. A lot of people won't put up with a system that only lasts 3 hours regardless of wheter or not it's rechargeable.

[OB1]

Probably 3 hours with the light and 6 hours without it. I doubt this will change anyone's mind about getting it as long as the system is at the right price and has enough good games at launch. Hell even if it didn't have any good games it would still probably fly off shelves based off of the PlayStation name and Sony's marketing. 3-6 hours of rechargeable battery life is not a bad thing at all.

[Great Rumbler]

Rechargeable = Free, in case you didn't know.

True, but that doesn't make it all whole lot better. It's still 3-6 hours and when it runs out you have to recharge it...for 3-6 hours!!

3-6 hours of rechargeable battery life is not a bad thing at all.

Weren't you the one who said "Sony knows what they are doing and they won't release a handheld with a bad battery life."? 3-6 hours IS a bad battery life!! It's horrible!! And now you're saying "Oh well battery life doesn't really matter."?

Hell even if it didn't have any good games it would still probably fly off shelves based off of the PlayStation name and Sony's marketing.

When handhelds die they have good reasons!! Like bad battery life or no good games! If the PSP has both, do you actually think it can compete?!

Edit: I can't believe I forgot such an important factor!! PRICE!! We still haven't heard a price for the PSP, but I really doubt it will be less than $200. And if the PSP releases with no or few good game, a horrible battery life, and a $200 price tag it'll be dead on arrival no matter how much Sony advertises it.

[OB1]

True, but that doesn't make it all whole lot better. It's still 3-6 hours and when it runs out you have to recharge it...for 3-6 hours!!

It doesn't make it a whole lot better?? Instead of paying 5 bucks for every three hours of play like with the Gamegear, you pay.... *gasp!*... nothing!!

And what makes you think that you'll have to charge the battery for 3-6 hours? That doesn't make any sense.

Weren't you the one who said "Sony knows what they are doing and they won't release a handheld with a bad battery life."? 3-6 hours IS a bad battery life!! It's horrible!! And now you're saying "Oh well battery life doesn't really matter."?

Yes, and this proves that they know what they are doing. Having a AA battery life of 3-6 hours would kill the system, but that's not the case, now is it? Making it rechargeable changes everything. If the Gamegear had a rechargeable battery then it would have been much more successful.

When handhelds die they have good reasons!! Like bad battery life or no good games! If the PSP has both, do you actually think it can compete?!

Edit: I can't believe I forgot such an important factor!! PRICE!! We still haven't heard a price for the PSP, but I really doubt it will be less than $200. And if the PSP releases with no or few good game, a horrible battery life, and a $200 price tag it'll be dead on arrival no matter how much Sony advertises it.

If it's too expensive and won't have any good games then it probably won't be a success. Hopefully it won't be too expensive, but I am certain that it will have good games at launch. Just about every third-party will be making games for it I'm sure. But if it is going to be reasonably priced it probably won't need a lineup much better than the PS2 launch lineup (meaning good, not great).

[A Black Falcon]

Heh... I knew OB1 would try to make this sound like a good thing... :)

It doesn't make it a whole lot better?? Instead of paying 5 bucks for every three hours of play like with the Gamegear, you pay.... *gasp!*... nothing!!

And what makes you think that you'll have to charge the battery for 3-6 hours? That doesn't make any sense.

Nothing? Sorry, but electricity costs money...

Oh, and its not just about if I play for 3 hours at one sitting... its about if I play for over three hours away from a power outlet. And I'm sure that plenty of people will in fact want to be able to play for over 3 to 6 hours away from power... and then of course once that 3 to 6 hours runs out you can't use the thing off the electricity for ANOTHER three to six hours. That's a major problem for a 'portable' console...

What about someone on a long plane flight? Partway through the thing gives out and you cannot use it for the rest of the trip... batteries have all kinds of problems, like high cost, but they're easily replacable. Or what if you use it a lot in a morning then realie that for the next six hours you won't be able to use the thing? That's not good...

10-20 vs. 3-6. Hmm, I wonder which I prefer...

If it's too expensive and won't have any good games then it probably won't be a success. Hopefully it won't be too expensive, but I am certain that it will have good games at launch. Just about every third-party will be making games for it I'm sure. But if it is going to be reasonably priced it probably won't need a lineup much better than the PS2 launch lineup (meaning good, not great).

It'll have games because of the Sony name... but whether it'll be a success? As I've said many times, I don't know... with that battery life and high price I do not see any way it'll beat the GBA.

Plus, Nintendo's next handheld will come out soon afterwards...

[OB1]

Heh... I knew OB1 would try to make this sound like a good thing...

That's because it is a good thing.

Heh... I knew OB1 would try to make this sound like a good thing...

Oh please, now you're comparing the cost of home electricity to batteries? You're nuts.

Oh, and its not just about if I play for 3 hours at one sitting... its about if I play for over three hours away from a power outlet. And I'm sure that plenty of people will in fact want to be able to play for over 3 to 6 hours away from power... and then of course once that 3 to 6 hours runs out you can't use the thing off the electricity for ANOTHER three to six hours. That's a major problem for a 'portable' console...

You'll be able to recharge it in a car or a building, so unless you live in the mountains far away from civilization it shouldn't be a problem. And what is with you people thinking that it takes as long to recharge these batteries as it does to drain them? Most high-end electronic devices don't take long to recharge.

What about someone on a long plane flight? Partway through the thing gives out and you cannot use it for the rest of the trip... batteries have all kinds of problems, like high cost, but they're easily replacable. Or what if you use it a lot in a morning then realie that for the next six hours you won't be able to use the thing? That's not good...

10-20 vs. 3-6. Hmm, I wonder which I prefer...

Ever heard of spare battery packs before? You're so silly. If the PSP is anything like a digital camera or portable DVD player, you'll be able to switch battery packs for situations such as long flights.

It'll have games because of the Sony name... but whether it'll be a success? As I've said many times, I don't know... with that battery life and high price I do not see any way it'll beat the GBA.

Plus, Nintendo's next handheld will come out soon afterwards...

If it does things that Nintendo's next handheld won't be able to do (and that's taking into consideration that the next Nintendo handheld will be out shorter after the PSP is released), is reasonably priced, and has good games then it won't be difficult for Sony to seriously compete with the Gameboy or take over the handheld market. As I explained above, the battery life isn't an issue.

[A Black Falcon]

Oh please, now you're comparing the cost of home electricity to batteries? You're nuts.

I'm just saying that its not free. :)

You'll be able to recharge it in a car or a building, so unless you live in the mountains far away from civilization it shouldn't be a problem. And what is with you people thinking that it takes as long to recharge these batteries as it does to drain them? Most high-end electronic devices don't take long to recharge.

Well given that I don't have anything that uses batteries other than my Game Boys... and I don't remember how long the old GB battery packs took to charge or lasted... 1 hr charge to run for 6 hours, huh? Not as bad as I would have thought... but still, its a problem. Yes, a second battery pack would help, but I'm sure they'll make you buy it for extra...

If it does things that Nintendo's next handheld won't be able to do (and that's taking into consideration that the next Nintendo handheld will be out shorter after the PSP is released), is reasonably priced, and has good games then it won't be difficult for Sony to seriously compete with the Gameboy or take over the handheld market. As I explained above, the battery life isn't an issue.

Sorry, but it definitely is an issue. Try to ignore it if you want, but it IS an issue... I just can't see how you can say 'three hours is fine for a PORTABLE system that you want to use a lot'!

Oh, and the biggest issue is price. As in, for the price of a PSP ($200? $250? More?) you'll be able to get a GBA and a whole lot of games...

[OB1]

I'm just saying that its not free.

Well given that I don't have anything that uses batteries other than my Game Boys... and I don't remember how long the old GB battery packs took to charge or lasted... 1 hr charge to run for 6 hours, huh? Not as bad as I would have thought... but still, its a problem. Yes, a second battery pack would help, but I'm sure they'll make you buy it for extra...

Most rechargeable battery packs are around $15-20, so it's no big deal.

Sorry, but it definitely is an issue. Try to ignore it if you want, but it IS an issue... I just can't see how you can say 'three hours is fine for a PORTABLE system that you want to use a lot'!

Oh, and the biggest issue is price. As in, for the price of a PSP ($200? $250? More?) you'll be able to get a GBA and a whole lot of games...

Did you just completely forget about the whole rechargeable and replaceable battery pack points that I discussed?? What's with you?

And let's not talk about price until that's revealed. If the system is around $200-250 then that would be pretty good considering how powerful it's going to be. The GBA will look very bad in comparison to the PSP, which is why Nintendo needs to get their next handheld out ASAP.

[A Black Falcon]

:D

Most rechargeable battery packs are around $15-20, so it's no big deal.

Still, that's a large additional cost... almost as much as a game...

Did you just completely forget about the whole rechargeable and replaceable battery pack points that I discussed?? What's with you?

And let's not talk about price until that's revealed. If the system is around $200-250 then that would be pretty good considering how powerful it's going to be. The GBA will look very bad in comparison to the PSP, which is why Nintendo needs to get their next handheld out ASAP.

That price would be good for what you get, but the GBA will be substantially lower and, I'm sure, will still have a great lineup of recent and upcoming games... sure, its completely outpowered by the PSP, but I would hardly count it out just because of that. Between the momentum of so many years of GB domination, the huge library of great games, the significantly lower price, and the substantially longer battery life I am not at all afraid that the PSP will quickly win. No way. Nintendo will have plenty of time to come up with their next GB...

Oh, and I know its quite unlikely, but I really wish it'll support (in some way) GB carts... that library of 1200+ games would help it a lot...

[OB1]

Still, that's a large additional cost... almost as much as a game...

$15 is a lot??! You have to pay over a third of that just to be able to use headphones with the GBA SP, and you pay that very same amount to get a crummy external light for the regular GBA!

That price would be good for what you get, but the GBA will be substantially lower and, I'm sure, will still have a great lineup of recent and upcoming games... sure, its completely outpowered by the PSP, but I would hardly count it out just because of that. Between the momentum of so many years of GB domination, the huge library of great games, the significantly lower price, and the substantially longer battery life I am not at all afraid that the PSP will quickly win. No way. Nintendo will have plenty of time to come up with their next GB...

Oh, and I know its quite unlikely, but I really wish it'll support (in some way) GB carts... that library of 1200+ games would help it a lot...

There's no way the GBA is going to be able to stand up against the PSP, and if that were true then Nintendo wouldn't be rushing to get their next handheld out as soon as possible. No, obviously your statement is wrong. It'll be like the PS2 competing with the SNES (if the SNES was the only console out until the PS2 came out).

[A Black Falcon]

$15 is a lot??! You have to pay over a third of that just to be able to use headphones with the GBA SP, and you pay that very same amount to get a crummy external light for the regular GBA!

Its not a LOT, but its almost the price of a game...

Oh, and Nintendo's decision to leave out a headphone jack is really stupid.

There's no way the GBA is going to be able to stand up against the PSP, and if that were true then Nintendo wouldn't be rushing to get their next handheld out as soon as possible. No, obviously your statement is wrong. It'll be like the PS2 competing with the SNES (if the SNES was the only console out until the PS2 came out).

Not technically, but I'd hardly rule out the idea that it could still be quite successful after the release of the PSP... absolutely not... and the GBA is far more powerful than a SNES! And as I've said, there are more factors here...

[OB1]

Its not a LOT, but its almost the price of a game...

Oh, and Nintendo's decision to leave out a headphone jack is really stupid.

It's half the price of a regular GBA game. It's even cheaper than a month's supply of AA batteries for GBA owners who have to buy batteries themselves instead of getting them from their parents. :p

Not technically, but I'd hardly rule out the idea that it could still be quite successful after the release of the PSP... absolutely not... and the GBA is far more powerful than a SNES! And as I've said, there are more factors here...

The GBA's 2D capabilities are better than the SNES', but it still can't do 3D well. The SNES is the most similar to the GBA than any other console.

If the GBA could stand up against the PSP then Nintendo wouldn't be rushing to get their next handheld out the door around the time the PSP comes out. That is a point you seem to be ignoring.

[Great Rumbler]

If the PSP is anything like a digital camera or portable DVD player, you'll be able to switch battery packs for situations such as long flights.

IF it is and with such a low batter life it should be.

And what is with you people thinking that it takes as long to recharge these batteries as it does to drain them?

The rechargeable batteries I have take about 3 hours, and doesn't the GBA take several hours to recharge?

Most rechargeable battery packs are around $15-20, so it's no big deal.

Except that it's an additional charge on top of the potentially high price you are already paying. Of course you could not get an extra battery, but then you'd have to contend with the short battery life.

If the system is around $200-250 then that would be pretty good considering how powerful it's going to be.

But not compared to Nintendo's next handheld.

That's because it is a good thing.

Yes, having a rechargeable battery is a good thing, having a short battery life, however, is not.

[OB1]

IF it is and with such a low batter life it should be.

Sony compared the PSP to a high-end electronic device so it should be.

The rechargeable batteries I have take about 3 hours, and doesn't the GBA take several hours to recharge?

Most modern digital cameras, portable DVD players, etc. have pretty short battery lives but don't take very long to recharge. I think the GBA SP takes around two-to-three hours to recharge, and that's because it's one of the cheaper rechargeable batteries out there.

Except that it's an additional charge on top of the potentially high price you are already paying. Of course you could not get an extra battery, but then you'd have to contend with the short battery life.

You could use that same argument against Nitnendo with the light-less GBA where you had to pay extra for an external light or with the GBA SP where you have to pay extra for headphone jack. That's the way things are.

If Sony is smart they'll include a recharging base for the PSP so that you're constantly recharging it when you're not using it, like a PDA. For long trips you can buy an extra battery pack. That's really not that much of a hassle.

But not compared to Nintendo's next handheld.

Possibly, hopefully, but we know nothing about Nintendo's next handheld. If they want to seriously compete with the PSP then they'll have to make a system that is comparable to the PSP in terms of power and capability, so it'll probably be around the same price as the PSP. Or Nintendo could simply make a new handheld that's not even half as powerful as the PSP so that they can keep that $99 price point. It's too early to tell.

Yes, having a rechargeable battery is a good thing, having a short battery life, however, is not.

Sony can make this a very easy thing to manage. People are used to short, rechargeable battery lives with higher-end portable electronics.

[A Black Falcon]

IF it is and with such a low batter life it should be.

IF by 'should' you mean 'better'...

The rechargeable batteries I have take about 3 hours, and doesn't the GBA take several hours to recharge?

Ah, so another overly optimistic assesment by OB1? It'd hardly surprise me, he seems determined to be a PSP fanboy or something...

I would think it'd be more than an hour... and that recharge time is a big minus. It means that that spare battery really isn't 'optional'... but since this is Sony, I'm sure they'll make you pay extra, and quite a bit extra, to get the thing...

Except that it's an additional charge on top of the potentially high price you are already paying. Of course you could not get an extra battery, but then you'd have to contend with the short battery life.

Exactly... and $20 or more is quite a lot more than $2-$5 for a SP plug adapter...

Yes, having a rechargeable battery is a good thing, having a short battery life, however, is not.

But as OB1 says, three hours IS a good battery life! :bang:

But not compared to Nintendo's next handheld.

We know nothing about it, but I'm sure it'll crush the PSP...

The GBA's 2D capabilities are better than the SNES', but it still can't do 3D well. The SNES is the most similar to the GBA than any other console.

If the GBA could stand up against the PSP then Nintendo wouldn't be rushing to get their next handheld out the door around the time the PSP comes out. That is a point you seem to be ignoring.

"rushing" is just about the last term I'd describe to explain what I see as the pace Nintendo is going on the GBA successor... we know NOTHING about it...


So... the question is, what should the next GB have in it? What should it have, and what do we wish it had... :)

-GB compatibility (somehow, it'd help a LOT)
-large optical media
-power greater than a PSP (which will be DC-level... at best...)
-long battery life (this is KEY, and its always been central to what Nintendo has done with the GB... battery life has been, all along, their central focus... and its been what brought them above most of their competitors for years...)
(oh, and 3-6 hours isn't long)
-bigger screen
-analog stick and d-pad (needed for 3d games...)
-as many buttons as a major console controller (8-12, not 6)

[OB1]

IF by 'should' you mean 'better'...

Unless Sony has a team of wild monkeys heading their PSP department then I see no reason why they'd make such a huge mistake as to leave out the possibility of switching battery packs.

Ah, so another overly optimistic assesment by OB1? It'd hardly surprise me, he seems determined to be a PSP fanboy or something...

I would think it'd be more than an hour... and that recharge time is a big minus. It means that that spare battery really isn't 'optional'... but since this is Sony, I'm sure they'll make you pay extra, and quite a bit extra, to get the thing...

No you see, I'm not a blind Nintendo fanboy like you are. Nintendo is my favorite gaming company but I know very well that they make huge mistakes and are not invincible as their fanboys seem to think they are. I do not wish Sony to succeed in the portable arena, but I refuse to let my love of Nintendo's games blind me into thinking that Sony doesn't know what they're doing.

Read my reply to GR's post.

Exactly... and $20 or more is quite a lot more than $2-$5 for a SP plug adapter...

Yeah, and that extra $15 or so is totally gonna ruin Sony's chances at being successful in the portable market.

You're even more of a blind fanboy than I gave you credit for.

But as OB1 says, three hours IS a good battery life!

If it's rechargeable then it is perfectly fine.

We know nothing about it, but I'm sure it'll crush the PSP...

Like the N64 crushed the PSX? Or the Gamecube crushed the PS2? Yup, you got me there! :roll2:

"rushing" is just about the last term I'd describe to explain what I see as the pace Nintendo is going on the GBA successor... we know NOTHING about it...

Just because we know very little about it doesn't mean that Nintendo isn't frantic. Before the PSP was announced Nintendo made it very clear that they wouldn't replace the GBA anytime soon, then soon after Sony announced the PSP Nintendo said that they'd have something to compete with it "even though Nintendo really doesn't need to compete with Sony".

[A Black Falcon]

Like the N64 crushed the PSX? Or the Gamecube crushed the PS2? Yup, you got me there!

PS2-Dreamcast.

No you see, I'm not a blind Nintendo fanboy like you are. Nintendo is my favorite gaming company but I know very well that they make huge mistakes and are not invincible as their fanboys seem to think they are. I do not wish Sony to succeed in the portable arena, but I refuse to let my love of Nintendo's games blind me into thinking that Sony doesn't know what they're doing.

If Sony's marketing machine is blinding even Nintendo fans then maybe we ARE doomed... :(

Unless Sony has a team of wild monkeys heading their PSP department then I see no reason why they'd make such a huge mistake as to leave out the possibility of switching battery packs.

Nintendo didn't, but the SP does have dramatically better battery life...

Yeah, and that extra $15 or so is totally gonna ruin Sony's chances at being successful in the portable market.

Totally ruin? No. Hurt? Yes.

If it's rechargeable then it is perfectly fine.

You are completely insane...

Just because we know very little about it doesn't mean that Nintendo isn't frantic. Before the PSP was announced Nintendo made it very clear that they wouldn't replace the GBA anytime soon, then soon after Sony announced the PSP Nintendo said that they'd have something to compete with it "even though Nintendo really doesn't need to compete with Sony".

Sorry, but it just won't keel over and die so quickly! I just can't understand why you think this very expensive (for a handheld) system with plenty of issues will run over the market and in a matter of months completely take it over! That is just totally ridiculous! Can't you give the GBA any credit at all?

Sure Nintendo's working on a new Game Boy, but do they need to hurry unnecissarially fast? No.

Sony can make this a very easy thing to manage. People are used to short, rechargeable battery lives with higher-end portable electronics.

Rechargability is all well and good but it just doesn't negate the huge problems with such a short battery life! You compare this to PDAs or something... well PDAs are very different. They are designed to run for short periods of time while you take notes or something, not to run for hours while you play games, so they just don't NEED long battery lives. Game systems are so different... you can't just say 'if its fine for them its fine for game systems'. The past fifteen years have proven that battery lives that short are NOT fine. Promote rechargability all you want, that doesn't change that basic fact...

[OB1]

PS2-Dreamcast.

Sega stopped being popular at the end of the Genesis' lifespan. Sony is now the most popular video game maker in the world, unfortunately.

If Sony's marketing machine is blinding even Nintendo fans then maybe we ARE doomed...

"Marketing"?? Is that the best you've got?? If I gave a damn about marketing then Halo would be my favorite FPS, Tekken would be my favorite fighting game, and the PS2 would be my favorite console.

Nintendo didn't, but the SP does have dramatically better battery life...

You can buy spare battery packs for the SP at Nintendo's official site.

Totally ruin? No. Hurt? Yes.

Barely. You're reaching, ABF.

You are completely insane...

Correction: I'm looking at this with an unbiased mind while you are most certainly not.

Sorry, but it just won't keel over and die so quickly! I just can't understand why you think this very expensive (for a handheld) system with plenty of issues will run over the market and in a matter of months completely take it over! That is just totally ridiculous! Can't you give the GBA any credit at all?

Sure Nintendo's working on a new Game Boy, but do they need to hurry unnecissarially fast? No.

Okay, let's analyze this, shall we?

Did I say the GBA would "keel over and die quickly"? Nope! Did I say that the PSP will "run over the market and in a matter of months completely take it over"? Nope, I didn't even hint at that! You completely pulled that out of your ass, as per usual.

And we still don't know how expensive the PSP will be, so calling it an expensive handheld before we even know the price is extremely stupid of you, even by your standards.

Rechargability is all well and good but it just doesn't negate the huge problems with such a short battery life! You compare this to PDAs or something... well PDAs are very different. They are designed to run for short periods of time while you take notes or something, not to run for hours while you play games, so they just don't NEED long battery lives. Game systems are so different... you can't just say 'if its fine for them its fine for game systems'. The past fifteen years have proven that battery lives that short are NOT fine. Promote rechargability all you want, that doesn't change that basic fact...

Rechargeability doesn't change anything... oh boy. Let's see now... why did the Gamegear fail? Hmm... could it be that you had to pay a fortune for batteries in a short amount of time? ....BINGO! Now how to fix that... hmm....

I got it! What if they made it so that instead of paying lots of money for batteries every three hours, you can recharge the battery for free! WOW, would that be awesome or what!!



Really now, I was using the recharger base of a PDA for an example. It makes it very conveniant to recharge the system since that's where you'd put the handheld when you're not using it. And for those people that like to play games for seven hours in a row, they could get a spare battery pack. Simple, no?

[Great Rumbler]

Like the N64 crushed the PSX? Or the Gamecube crushed the PS2?

Except that the N64 and the Gamecube weren't compatible with past systems, while the GBA and if Nintendo is smart the GBA's succesor. That's a VERY big plus for Nintendo's handhelds-backwards compatiblity.

[OB1]

Except that the N64 and the Gamecube weren't compatible with past systems, while the GBA and if Nintendo is smart the GBA's succesor. That's a VERY big plus for Nintendo's handhelds-backwards compatiblity.

You think that if the Gamecube could play N64, SNES, and NES games that Nintendo would be #1 right now?

[A Black Falcon]

Except that the N64 and the Gamecube weren't compatible with past systems, while the GBA and if Nintendo is smart the GBA's succesor. That's a VERY big plus for Nintendo's handhelds-backwards compatiblity.

Yeah, they really must find a way to make it backwards-compatible. That'd be just such an incredibly huge boost to the thing... leaving it out WOULD be asking for Sony to take over, I think.

Sega stopped being popular at the end of the Genesis' lifespan. Sony is now the most popular video game maker in the world, unfortunately.

I never said it was a perfect comparison.

You can buy spare battery packs for the SP at Nintendo's official site.

Sure, but its a pain to replace them...

Rechargeability doesn't change anything... oh boy. Let's see now... why did the Gamegear fail? Hmm... could it be that you had to pay a fortune for batteries in a short amount of time? ....BINGO! Now how to fix that... hmm....

I got it! What if they made it so that instead of paying lots of money for batteries every three hours, you can recharge the battery for free! WOW, would that be awesome or what!!



Really now, I was using the recharger base of a PDA for an example. It makes it very conveniant to recharge the system since that's where you'd put the handheld when you're not using it. And for those people that like to play games for seven hours in a row, they could get a spare battery pack. Simple, no?

No. Its far more complex than using a console with a longer battery life. More complex, more things to remember, more possibilities of doing something wrong (forget to charge something? Wait several hours...), more pricey... its just a much bigger pain! And even with two battery packs it still won't last as long as a GBA... its just not that simple and it IS a very significant difference. I just don't see how you can keep denying that.

Okay, let's analyze this, shall we?

Did I say the GBA would "keel over and die quickly"? Nope! Did I say that the PSP will "run over the market and in a matter of months completely take it over"? Nope, I didn't even hint at that! You completely pulled that out of your ass, as per usual.

And we still don't know how expensive the PSP will be, so calling it an expensive handheld before we even know the price is extremely stupid of you, even by your standards.

You sure seem to have been implying that... because the next GB probably won't be too far behind, so for the PSP to take over the industry before the GB has a chance to catch up with equal hardware it'll have to sell amazingly well and crush the GBA in months... which of course is impossible given the PSP's limitations.



What will limit the PSP from beating the GBA? 1) Price. Think of the market for handheld games! It is noticably younger than the main console market... sure, Sony well might be counting on older gamers going and buying the thing... but I wouldn't be so sure. Older gamers don't seem to be as interested on the whole in portable gaming... that is a MAJOR hurdle for a console aimed straight at older gamers. Because, think about it, the PSP is in so many ways way, way far away from what the younger marke would want. Its very expensive, first... that is a major problem for a big part of the handheld market. It also needs to be recharged (something easy to forget), you have to switch other batteries, etc... all that stuff will hurt with that market!

Sony is clearly betting that the now small older portable gaming console market (as opposed to cellphone/PDA games) will grow dramatically with this system. I am just not so sure that that's a given...

[Great Rumbler]

Originally posted by OB1
You think that if the Gamecube could play N64, SNES, and NES games that Nintendo would be #1 right now?

It's possible I suppose, but really you can't compare any of Nintendo's past consoles with the GBA and it's successor. Things are just too different, I think.

I suppose I should have taken my own advice from the last PSP thread and not posted this at all, but it's already be done. Anyway, let's leave this where it's at now and pick it up sometime next year.

[OB1]

I never said it was a perfect comparison.

It's a terrible comparison.

Sure, but its a pain to replace them...

It's always a pain to get peripherals and spare parts from Nintendo. You can only buy Nintendo's headphone adapter at the official site, did you know that?

No. Its far more complex than using a console with a longer battery life. More complex, more things to remember, more possibilities of doing something wrong (forget to charge something? Wait several hours...), more pricey... its just a much bigger pain! And even with two battery packs it still won't last as long as a GBA... its just not that simple and it IS a very significant difference. I just don't see how you can keep denying that.

Unless you're an invalid, recharging and changing batteries should not be difficult to do. You seem to have a very low opinion of the general public. Maybe for five-year-olds it would be a pain, but Sony won't be targeting the PSP towards children.

You sure seem to have been implying that... because the next GB probably won't be too far behind, so for the PSP to take over the industry before the GB has a chance to catch up with equal hardware it'll have to sell amazingly well and crush the GBA in months... which of course is impossible given the PSP's limitations.

I really don't think Nintendo will have their next handheld out on time. They're always late.

And so far the only "limitation" you know of is that you'll have to recharge the batteries more often. Oh no!

What will limit the PSP from beating the GBA? 1) Price. Think of the market for handheld games! It is noticably younger than the main console market... sure, Sony well might be counting on older gamers going and buying the thing... but I wouldn't be so sure. Older gamers don't seem to be as interested on the whole in portable gaming... that is a MAJOR hurdle for a console aimed straight at older gamers. Because, think about it, the PSP is in so many ways way, way far away from what the younger marke would want. Its very expensive, first... that is a major problem for a big part of the handheld market. It also needs to be recharged (something easy to forget), you have to switch other batteries, etc... all that stuff will hurt with that market!

Sony is clearly betting that the now small older portable gaming console market (as opposed to cellphone/PDA games) will grow dramatically with this system. I am just not so sure that that's a given...

Adults don't like handheld devices? Wow, that's news to me! The reason why Sony has a very good chance of taking over the market is because they will be targeting the system towards adults! As you can see by the PS2 and X-Box's current lead over the Gamecube, adults buy more games than kids do. Children make up less than 50% of the video game market, and that is why Nintendo is #3 and Sony is #1.

[OB1]

It's possible I suppose, but really you can't compare any of Nintendo's past consoles with the GBA and it's successor. Things are just too different, I think.

I suppose I should have taken my own advice from the last PSP thread and not posted this at all, but it's already be done. Anyway, let's leave this where it's at now and pick it up sometime next year.

They're more alike than you think. ;)

[Great Rumbler]

ABF and myself think the GBA and it's successor will stay on top. OB1 thinks their doom is at hand. But in the end it's still about a year till the PSP comes out and will be longer before we can tell anything significant, so let's just hold off our speculation until then.

[A Black Falcon]

It's a terrible comparison.

Far closer and more accurate than your comparisons!

It's always a pain to get peripherals and spare parts from Nintendo. You can only buy Nintendo's headphone adapter at the official site, did you know that?

Uhh... why do you mention the headphone adapter so often when I said that its an incredibly stupid idea to have it as a required extra? So its hard to get... so? Does that matter a lot? I think getting headphones that fit that plug isn't too hard...

Unless you're an invalid, recharging and changing batteries should not be difficult to do. You seem to have a very low opinion of the general public. Maybe for five-year-olds it would be a pain, but Sony won't be targeting the PSP towards children.

And that fact is a big part of why they might be in a lot more trouble than you expect.

I really don't think Nintendo will have their next handheld out on time. They're always late.

Sure, but three to six months here won't hurt much at all. Not if the next GB is anywhere near as good as it easily could be!

And so far the only "limitation" you know of is that you'll have to recharge the batteries more often. Oh no!

Go ahead and understate it all you want, but it is a significant issue with a so-called-portable console. You are limited by the batteries. If they run out you are in trouble... if you use normal batteries at least you can always go to the store and buy more. Being tethered to a power supply is far more limiting... especially when the battery life is short like this thing's is. And don't mention 'buy a second battery' because you can do that with a GBA-SP too and run it for 30 hours instead of 15... it is a MAJOR limitation! Especially for people who actually would use a portable console in a portable setting...

Adults don't like handheld devices? Wow, that's news to me! The reason why Sony has a very good chance of taking over the market is because they will be targeting the system towards adults! As you can see by the PS2 and X-Box's current lead over the Gamecube, adults buy more games than kids do. Children make up less than 50% of the video game market, and that is why Nintendo is #3 and Sony is #1

OB1, that dodges the whole point of what I was saying! I said 'there isn't a big market for portable consoles for adults at this time'. and 'I just don't know if the PSP will magically create one out of thin air'. You clearly think that it will... but I have VERY strong doubts. I think gamers who get older are less likely to WANT a portable console, Sony or not...

[OB1]

Far closer and more accurate than your comparisons!

I'm actually comparing consoles from the same companies that we're comparing handhelds with. Your comparison is crap.

Uhh... why do you mention the headphone adapter so often when I said that its an incredibly stupid idea to have it as a required extra? So its hard to get... so? Does that matter a lot? I think getting headphones that fit that plug isn't too hard...

Yes it matters, as it shows that little things like this don't kill a system. Having to get an extra battery pack to make things more convenient will not kill the PSP.

And you need the special GBA SP headphone adapter to use headphones. It fits into the recharge socket.

And that fact is a big part of why they might be in a lot more trouble than you expect.

Adults like handheld electronic devices, adults have money to pay for said devices, and adults make up most of the videogame market. I don't see how Sony targeting adults with the PSP is going to do anything but make it a huge success.

Sure, but three to six months here won't hurt much at all. Not if the next GB is anywhere near as good as it easily could be!

If it's comparable to the PSP in every way then sure Nintendo probably won't suffer too much. But that's a big if...

Go ahead and understate it all you want, but it is a significant issue with a so-called-portable console. You are limited by the batteries. If they run out you are in trouble... if you use normal batteries at least you can always go to the store and buy more. Being tethered to a power supply is far more limiting... especially when the battery life is short like this thing's is. And don't mention 'buy a second battery' because you can do that with a GBA-SP too and run it for 30 hours instead of 15... it is a MAJOR limitation! Especially for people who actually would use a portable console in a portable setting...
/quote]

So buying an extra $15-20 battery pack is much worse than buying $20 worth of batteries each month?? You're off your rocker, boy. This will only be a limitation for extremely lazy people.

[quote]OB1, that dodges the whole point of what I was saying! I said 'there isn't a big market for portable consoles for adults at this time'. and 'I just don't know if the PSP will magically create one out of thin air'. You clearly think that it will... but I have VERY strong doubts. I think gamers who get older are less likely to WANT a portable console, Sony or not...

That's absolutely insane. "There's no market for handhelds targeted towards adults"??? You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? The PSP will fit in perfectly with cell phones, portable DVD players, PDAs, digital cameras, MP3 players, etc. The handheld electronics market is incredibly huge, and assuming that nobody would want to play a powerful handheld gaming system shows extreme ignorance towards this subject. Adults love portable electronics, and adults love games. But putting them together will somehow result in tragedy? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

[A Black Falcon]

I'm actually comparing consoles from the same companies that we're comparing handhelds with. Your comparison is crap.

There is no comparison quite like this one, so none of them will be anywhere near perfect...

Yes it matters, as it shows that little things like this don't kill a system. Having to get an extra battery pack to make things more convenient will not kill the PSP.

And you need the special GBA SP headphone adapter to use headphones. It fits into the recharge socket.

I meant GBA-SP-only headphones, which I bet some stores carry...

Adults like handheld electronic devices, adults have money to pay for said devices, and adults make up most of the videogame market. I don't see how Sony targeting adults with the PSP is going to do anything but make it a huge success.

But do they want handheld gaming consoles? That's a quite different question from asking if they want cell phones or PDAs! I am just not sure at all that that market is there. Eventually? Quite possibly, as gaming grows in strength and popularity even more yes, handhelds will spread more evenly to older groups... but now? Its mostly younger gamers. And the older ones aren't showing signs that this is a big ignored market from any way I can tell...

Also, who is the PSP for? Its not for children (the majority of the GBA's market) because of price primarially and battery life second (children are more likely to find that battery setup hard to deal with...). Its not for Nintendo fans, or fans of 2d gaming. Is it for 'hardcore' gamers? Probably not -- Sony has never aimed its consoles at hardcore gamers. No, they're aiming at older teens and up, people who are mostly casual gamers and have PS2s... the question is, do those people want a handheld console like the PSP? I'm not sure. Some do. Some will get it because of Sony's hype. But will that be enough? I don't know. I hope not...

If it's comparable to the PSP in every way then sure Nintendo probably won't suffer too much. But that's a big if...

Right, because Sony is a better hardware developer than Nintendo, as we've so clearly seen in the past...

Uh, you should know far better than THAT!

[OB1]

There is no comparison quite like this one, so none of them will be anywhere near perfect...

Mine is closer.

I meant GBA-SP-only headphones, which I bet some stores carry...

Yeah but they're more expensive than Nintendo's official stuff.

But do they want handheld gaming consoles? That's a quite different question from asking if they want cell phones or PDAs! I am just not sure at all that that market is there. Eventually? Quite possibly, as gaming grows in strength and popularity even more yes, handhelds will spread more evenly to older groups... but now? Its mostly younger gamers. And the older ones aren't showing signs that this is a big ignored market from any way I can tell...

The reason why it's mostly younger gamers now is because that's who Nintendo targets the GBA towards. Duh.

Also, who is the PSP for? Its not for children (the majority of the GBA's market) because of price primarially and battery life second (children are more likely to find that battery setup hard to deal with...). Its not for Nintendo fans, or fans of 2d gaming. Is it for 'hardcore' gamers? Probably not -- Sony has never aimed its consoles at hardcore gamers. No, they're aiming at older teens and up, people who are mostly casual gamers and have PS2s... the question is, do those people want a handheld console like the PSP? I'm not sure. Some do. Some will get it because of Sony's hype. But will that be enough? I don't know. I hope not...

Who's it for? The same people that made Sony the king of the home console industry: casual gamers, teens, adults. Portable versions of home devices are usually even more popular than the home ones, since you can take them anywhere you want to. To say that none of this will apply to video games is ridiculous.

Right, because Sony is a better hardware developer than Nintendo, as we've so clearly seen in the past...

Uh, you should know far better than THAT!

I'm talking about everything else that the PSP will be able to do, i.e. play music, movies, go online, etc. Nintendo will most likely make their next GB a games-only console, which has backfired on them in the past with the N64 and Gamecube. Even if the next Nintendo handheld is just as powerful as the PSP but $100 less, most people are going to see all of the other functions as worth the extra moolah. MP3 players and portable DVD players are pretty damn expensive so it will be a big draw. The only problem I can think of is that Sony's UMD format is not going to be re-recordable, so copying movies or music to them will be a problem. It'll be interesting to see how they solve that, if they do.

[A Black Falcon]

Mine is closer.

Absolutely not...

Yeah but they're more expensive than Nintendo's official stuff.

True, but they're easy to get.

The reason why it's mostly younger gamers now is because that's who Nintendo targets the GBA towards. Duh.

Nintendo also targets older gamers some (all the SNES ports, strategy and RPG games...)... just not mainstream older gamers like Sony will. And that works very well for them... better than the 'aim younger' strategy does for main consoles, so clearly there is more of a market for this stuff in younger agegroups...

Who's it for? The same people that made Sony the king of the home console industry: casual gamers, teens, adults. Portable versions of home devices are usually even more popular than the home ones, since you can take them anywhere you want to. To say that none of this will apply to video games is ridiculous.

You think they'll lap this thing up and make it a big hit? Huh... I see no reason to think that. Game consoles just can't be directly compared to PDAs and cellphones!

I'm talking about everything else that the PSP will be able to do, i.e. play music, movies, go online, etc. Nintendo will most likely make their next GB a games-only console, which has backfired on them in the past with the N64 and Gamecube. Even if the next Nintendo handheld is just as powerful as the PSP but $100 less, most people are going to see all of the other functions as worth the extra moolah. MP3 players and portable DVD players are pretty damn expensive so it will be a big draw. The only problem I can think of is that Sony's UMD format is not going to be re-recordable, so copying movies or music to them will be a problem. It'll be interesting to see how they solve that, if they do.

Nintendo shouldn't include any of that stuff. Well, wireless multiplayer like some handhelds have would be great, but it doesn't need any of that other stuff...

And remember, there are TV and MP3 (third party, but still...) add-ons for the GBA...

[OB1]

Absolutely not...

So my example which was a comparison of two consoles from the two same video game makers we're talking about is not closer to the GBA vs. PSP situation than your example, which was comparing the PS2 to the Dreamcast, a system that never had a chance to survive at all?

Yup, you got me there! :roll2:

True, but they're easy to get.

But more expensive.

Nintendo also targets older gamers some (all the SNES ports, strategy and RPG games...)... just not mainstream older gamers like Sony will. And that works very well for them... better than the 'aim younger' strategy does for main consoles, so clearly there is more of a market for this stuff in younger agegroups...

That's completely false. Even Nintendo admits that they target the Gameboy towards kids. That's also why there isn't a single M-rated title available for any of the Gameboys (or there might be one M-rated game). The PSX became super-popular because Sony got people who would never touch a video game into gaming. They targeted non-gamers and adults, which is why they're #1 right now. They will try to do the same thing with the PSP, and much like the console industry before the PSX arrived, the handheld gaming industry is dominated by Nintendo and targeted mainly towards kids.

I'd also like to note that the reason why the GBA SP looks less like a "toy" and their ads are more mature is because Nintendo is trying to get more adults into handheld gaming.

You think they'll lap this thing up and make it a big hit? Huh... I see no reason to think that. Game consoles just can't be directly compared to PDAs and cellphones!

It's not just PDAs and cellphones, doofus, it's all portable electronics. Portable electronics are even more popular than home-only ones in many cases, and you have nothing but blind, stupid anti-logic to support your claim that adults and casual gamers wouldn't like to play their videogames on the go. You make no sense whatsoever.

Nintendo shouldn't include any of that stuff. Well, wireless multiplayer like some handhelds have would be great, but it doesn't need any of that other stuff...

And remember, there are TV and MP3 (third party, but still...) add-ons for the GBA...

Yes, and they're ridiculously expensive. I'd prefer if Nintendo kept the next Gameboy a gaming-only machine, but if they do want to compete with the PSP then they'll have to offer everything that the PSP does. One of the reasons why the GC suffered was because it couldn't play DVDs like the PS2 and X-Box could.

[A Black Falcon]

So my example which was a comparison of two consoles from the two same video game makers we're talking about is not closer to the GBA vs. PSP situation than your example, which was comparing the PS2 to the Dreamcast, a system that never had a chance to survive at all?

Yup, you got me there!

You've got to go to other publisher comparisons because nothing between Nintendo and Sony is even remotely close to this... not anywhere near the same ballpark...

That's completely false. Even Nintendo admits that they target the Gameboy towards kids. That's also why there isn't a single M-rated title available for any of the Gameboys (or there might be one M-rated game). The PSX became super-popular because Sony got people who would never touch a video game into gaming. They targeted non-gamers and adults, which is why they're #1 right now. They will try to do the same thing with the PSP, and much like the console industry before the PSX arrived, the handheld gaming industry is dominated by Nintendo and targeted mainly towards kids.

I'd also like to note that the reason why the GBA SP looks less like a "toy" and their ads are more mature is because Nintendo is trying to get more adults into handheld gaming.

Sorry, but there are a few M-rated GB games... not many, sure, but there definitely are some. Not many, true... but some. But because of the technology in the GB systems some games that are M on other consoles are T on the GB...

And yes, Nintendo is also trying to get more adults into handheld gaming... I don't know if its working. It might... but I'd just think adults wouldn't be as likely to use handheld systems (in a handheld setting, of course, anyone could use any system at home...). Oh, I'm sure plenty would... but is the untapped message as large as the one the PSX opened? I doubt it.

It's not just PDAs and cellphones, doofus, it's all portable electronics. Portable electronics are even more popular than home-only ones in many cases, and you have nothing but blind, stupid anti-logic to support your claim that adults and casual gamers wouldn't like to play their videogames on the go. You make no sense whatsoever.

Games on PDAs and cellphones are clearly fairly popular, but those things have more useful uses as well... a console doesn't, and requires a bigger time commitment. It really is a different focus, despite Sony trying to make it a multitask system...

Yes, and they're ridiculously expensive. I'd prefer if Nintendo kept the next Gameboy a gaming-only machine, but if they do want to compete with the PSP then they'll have to offer everything that the PSP does. One of the reasons why the GC suffered was because it couldn't play DVDs like the PS2 and X-Box could.

I'd far rather spend that $50 on a game, not on another DVD player... I liked the fact that Nintendo kept out the extras...

[OB1]

You've got to go to other publisher comparisons because nothing between Nintendo and Sony is even remotely close to this... not anywhere near the same ballpark...

Oh is that so? Well let's see how the two situations compare to each other:

Home console industry--

-Nintendo is king of the market, targets most of their games towards kids (even though "hardcore gamers" of all ages love them), and are so sure of themselves that they don't expect to lost that no. 1 spot anytime soon.

-Sony comes along, Nintendo fans laugh at them, but then they start attracting a whole new audience to gaming, and make video games "cool" to the general public. They take over the market from Nintendo because of great marketing and attracting adults and non-gamers to video games. Nintendo fans start crying.

Handheld industry--

--Nintendo is king of the market, targets most of their games towards kids (even though "hardcore gamers" of all ages love them), and are so sure of themselves that they don't expect to lost that no. 1 spot anytime soon.

-Sony announced that they're going to enter the handheld market, Nintendo fans laugh at them, but Sony plans on attracting a whole new audience to handheld gaming and plans on making it "cool" like PDAs, mp3 players, portable DVD players, and every other portable electronics device that adults love. Blind Nintendo fans laugh at them and use such great logic as "while portable electonics and videogames are popular amongst adults and mainstream America, there's no way those two things could work together!", while others who've learned their lesson prepare for a huge war between Sony and Nintendo in the handheld market, hoping that Nintendo will come out on top but not really believing that they will.

Sorry, but there are a few M-rated GB games... not many, sure, but there definitely are some. Not many, true... but some. But because of the technology in the GB systems some games that are M on other consoles are T on the GB...

It's because of the technology???!! Hahaha!

Yeah, it was because of the lesser technology that they took out cigarettes from the GBC Metal Gear game.

That's sad, ABF. There are only a handful of M-rated Gameboy games out there, and the reason for that is because publishers know what the Gameboy's target audience is.

"Technology"... oh my lord... That's rich.

Games on PDAs and cellphones are clearly fairly popular, but those things have more useful uses as well... a console doesn't, and requires a bigger time commitment. It really is a different focus, despite Sony trying to make it a multitask system...

So... let me get this straight: adults love video games, and adults love portable electronics, but... put them together and you have a complete failure?

Boy, you're getting smarter and smarter with each passing day!

I'd far rather spend that $50 on a game, not on another DVD player... I liked the fact that Nintendo kept out the extras...

So did I, especially since I already have three DVD players, but it did hurt Nintendo's GC sales.

[Dark Jaguar]

badgers mushrooms and... A SNAKE!

You know, I often wonder how cool it would have been if Nintendo had made the SNES backwards compatible, using the same slots as the NES basically (though of course the carts being shrunk is a must), and then made the N64 backwards compatible after that. Yes, I OFTEN wonder about that!

[Great Rumbler]

Handheld industry--

--Nintendo is king of the market, targets most of their games towards kids (even though "hardcore gamers" of all ages love them), and are so sure of themselves that they don't expect to lost that no. 1 spot anytime soon.

I think Nintendo is taking the PSP more seroiusly than the PS1, otherwise they wouldn't have announced a new GB for release only 3 years after the GBA.

[OB1]

That is true, so there is definitely more hope for Nintendo in the handheld market than there was for them during the PSX days, but you know... they're still Nintendo. It takes a very long time for them to change, to go with the flow.

[Great Rumbler]

With Yamauchi Nintendo wasn't changing very much, but I thinking with Iwata things are going to be different in terms of how their hardware is made among other things. Just look at the SP, it has sleek and cool looking design that tries to appeal to older gamers, that's the start I think. That's about the only thing he can do for now, but with the new hardware there's a lot more room for change.

[OB1]

Yes, the SP was definitely a step in the right direction for Nintendo. But according to ABF the GBA was already targeted towards adults so why did they make the SP look like less of a toy and target their ads towards an older demographic? Hmmm?

Hopefully Iwata will not make the same mistakes that Yamauchi did, but Nintendo is still anti-online, they still have bad marketing, and they aren't doing much to change their public image.

[A Black Falcon]

Yes, the SP was definitely a step in the right direction for Nintendo. But according to ABF the GBA was already targeted towards adults so why did they make the SP look like less of a toy and target their ads towards an older demographic? Hmmm?

Oh, the SP is a move towards older gamers, for sure... not so sure if its for the casual older market, since I just don't see killer ap games for casual older gamers in the lineup (unless they like the genres that GBA has lots of, like strategy/tactical games and RPGs). Its trying to expand the GB market, sure, but its also there just for the GB's own older fanbase... since a lot of them were annoyed with certain features of the GBA... now if they'd have launched the SP with some new games or something for older gamers and lots of (good) marketing maybe it would be different, but that's what I see. And anyway, two years after a console comes out is a bit late to finally be trying to attract a market that isn't particularly drawn to an established console... but I don't know. Its a move but given the realities of the GB and Nintendo it can only do so much.

Hopefully Iwata will not make the same mistakes that Yamauchi did, but Nintendo is still anti-online, they still have bad marketing, and they aren't doing much to change their public image.

Those things are all absolutely true...

You know, I often wonder how cool it would have been if Nintendo had made the SNES backwards compatible, using the same slots as the NES basically (though of course the carts being shrunk is a must), and then made the N64 backwards compatible after that. Yes, I OFTEN wonder about that!

Those things would all have been so awesome...

It's because of the technology???!! Hahaha!

Yeah, it was because of the lesser technology that they took out cigarettes from the GBC Metal Gear game.

That's sad, ABF. There are only a handful of M-rated Gameboy games out there, and the reason for that is because publishers know what the Gameboy's target audience is.

"Technology"... oh my lord... That's rich.

I didn't mean the GBA about that, just the GB (and GBC to a lesser extent). The NES didn't exactly have 'mature' games in big numbers either...

So did I, especially since I already have three DVD players, but it did hurt Nintendo's GC sales.

I don't think it hurt that much...

Home console industry--

-Nintendo is king of the market, targets most of their games towards kids (even though "hardcore gamers" of all ages love them), and are so sure of themselves that they don't expect to lost that no. 1 spot anytime soon.

-Sony comes along, Nintendo fans laugh at them, but then they start attracting a whole new audience to gaming, and make video games "cool" to the general public. They take over the market from Nintendo because of great marketing and attracting adults and non-gamers to video games. Nintendo fans start crying.

Nope. When the PSX came out the SNES was pretty old. It was near the end of its life, technologically for sure. Nintendo had just been through a tough fight with Sega, and had barely pulled out a win... Nintendo had over half the worldwide market, but not by a huge margin. Sega had dropped, sure, after the CD and 32X, but it was still there... Nintendo was NOT 'clearly dominant'. And Sony came in at the perfect time, when Sega was down and Nintendo running on clearly aging technology for several years... Yes, Nintendo did make some great games in those last years, and that's why they managed to survive until the N64 came out. Their share dropped, but they lasted quite some time against better competition just on sheer inertia and great games... for their fans. Sony exploited the situation with great marketing and a powerful console. They just hit at the exact right time... the CD systems before them had the right idea, the technology just wasn't ready yet. It was when the PSX was designed. The general public admittedly likes the great graphics, and the PSX did that... SNES did great for a console in its situation, though, I would say. Better than Sega at that point for sure (remember for a while Genesis and SNES were tied...).

Oh, and as for the 'make cool to general public', I'd say the first campaign like that was Sega's with the Genesis. Not Sony with the PSX.

Handheld industry--

--Nintendo is king of the market, targets most of their games towards kids (even though "hardcore gamers" of all ages love them), and are so sure of themselves that they don't expect to lost that no. 1 spot anytime soon.

-Sony announced that they're going to enter the handheld market, Nintendo fans laugh at them, but Sony plans on attracting a whole new audience to handheld gaming and plans on making it "cool" like PDAs, mp3 players, portable DVD players, and every other portable electronics device that adults love. Blind Nintendo fans laugh at them and use such great logic as "while portable electonics and videogames are popular amongst adults and mainstream America, there's no way those two things could work together!", while others who've learned their lesson prepare for a huge war between Sony and Nintendo in the handheld market, hoping that Nintendo will come out on top but not really believing that they will.

You make them sound far, far more similar than they are! In this case, Sony will be coming against a console in the middle of its life... past its prime perhaps but still strong. Okay, so there are some comparisons -- the GBA will surely, like the SNES, last quite some time just based on inertia and great games being released... but there are also key differences.

Like 50-55% vs. 90-98%. That one matters. A lot.

How about this? The N64 was a year behind the PSX. The GC was a year behind the PS2. Both of those greatly hurt Nintendo. They clearly learned that that will not work... now in this case they do not need to be there on day one with Sony, no way, but they can't be a year behind. Three months? No problem... as I said the GBA will do great for some time after the PSX comes out... I don't know how it'll compare to the SNES and the PSX, but I think it could do as well as that one did. And, especially in Japan, the SNES did very well for years...

[OB1]

Oh, the SP is a move towards older gamers, for sure... not so sure if its for the casual older market, since I just don't see killer ap games for casual older gamers in the lineup (unless they like the genres that GBA has lots of, like strategy/tactical games and RPGs). Its trying to expand the GB market, sure, but its also there just for the GB's own older fanbase... since a lot of them were annoyed with certain features of the GBA... now if they'd have launched the SP with some new games or something for older gamers and lots of (good) marketing maybe it would be different, but that's what I see. And anyway, two years after a console comes out is a bit late to finally be trying to attract a market that isn't particularly drawn to an established console... but I don't know. Its a move but given the realities of the GB and Nintendo it can only do so much.

So you finally admit that Nintendo's target audience for the GBA isn't adults. And that last line of yours doesn't make even a tiny bit of sense. "Trying to attract a market that isn't particularly drawn to an established console"... uh, that's kind of the point of the word "attract". You get people who aren't already playing the games to come to the system, since attracting people who already have Gameboys is kind of a stupid thing to do. You want to get the people who don't already have a Gameboy to buy one.

Those things are all absolutely true...

And that's why I expect to see Nintendo repeat similar mistakes with their next handheld as they did with the N64/GC.

I didn't mean the GBA about that, just the GB (and GBC to a lesser extent). The NES didn't exactly have 'mature' games in big numbers either...

That's because it wasn't until Mortal Kombat 2 came out that Nintendo started to allow real violence in their games, so everything before that was kid-friendly. There were a whole bunch of violent games available for the 2600 (like like Custer game where you rape Indians... seriously), so technology isn't what kept Nintendo from releasing violent games on the Gameboys.

I don't think it hurt that much...

Are you kidding me? Why do you think that when the PS2 first came out most people bought DVDs instead of games? While it was bad for Sony at first since they lost money per PS2 shipped, it gave the system an enourmous userbase so when the good games started rolling in they sold extremely well. The whole DVD player debate was very popular during the X-Box and GC launch, in case you forgot. I can't even remember how many people I saw in Babbages and Best Buy ask "which system can play DVD movies?" and bought them because of that.

Nope. When the PSX came out the SNES was pretty old. It was near the end of its life, technologically for sure. Nintendo had just been through a tough fight with Sega, and had barely pulled out a win... Nintendo had over half the worldwide market, but not by a huge margin. Sega had dropped, sure, after the CD and 32X, but it was still there... Nintendo was NOT 'clearly dominant'. And Sony came in at the perfect time, when Sega was down and Nintendo running on clearly aging technology for several years... Yes, Nintendo did make some great games in those last years, and that's why they managed to survive until the N64 came out. Their share dropped, but they lasted quite some time against better competition just on sheer inertia and great games... for their fans. Sony exploited the situation with great marketing and a powerful console. They just hit at the exact right time... the CD systems before them had the right idea, the technology just wasn't ready yet. It was when the PSX was designed. The general public admittedly likes the great graphics, and the PSX did that... SNES did great for a console in its situation, though, I would say. Better than Sega at that point for sure (remember for a while Genesis and SNES were tied...).

You're missing the point. The GBA technology will be far more inferior to the PSP than the SNES was to the PSX, so that evens things out. At the end of the SNES' lifespan Nintendo was king of the market. And remember that Sony didn't become insanely popular until around the time FFVII came out, so the Sony that fought against the SNES was not popular at the time. I'd also like to remind you that the first generation of PSX games looked like crap, so it wasn't that big of a leap over the previous CD systems that came out.

Oh, and as for the 'make cool to general public', I'd say the first campaign like that was Sega's with the Genesis. Not Sony with the PSX.

Sega tried that but it didn't work on a large scale. They were just "cool" amongst gamers, not mainstream America.

You make them sound far, far more similar than they are! In this case, Sony will be coming against a console in the middle of its life... past its prime perhaps but still strong. Okay, so there are some comparisons -- the GBA will surely, like the SNES, last quite some time just based on inertia and great games being released... but there are also key differences.

Like 50-55% vs. 90-98%. That one matters. A lot.

It sounds similar because it is, you dolt! And do you know what else is different? Nintendo isn't half as popular today as they were ten years ago. Also, the generation gap between the GBA and PSP will be over twice as large as the gap between the SNES and the PSX, no doubt about it.

How about this? The N64 was a year behind the PSX. The GC was a year behind the PS2. Both of those greatly hurt Nintendo. They clearly learned that that will not work... now in this case they do not need to be there on day one with Sony, no way, but they can't be a year behind. Three months? No problem... as I said the GBA will do great for some time after the PSX comes out... I don't know how it'll compare to the SNES and the PSX, but I think it could do as well as that one did. And, especially in Japan, the SNES did very well for years...

That's Japan, and that was back when Nintendo was the most popular gaming company in the world. They're not the most popular anymore. It's not just time that Nintendo has to worry about, it's also the capabilities of their next handheld. Sony is clearly going to target an older, mainstream audience and because of that Sony can make their handheld more expensive than the GBA. I really don't know if Nintendo is going to do that. It's probably going to end up much like the PSX/N64 war where Sony got ahead by attracting adults and non-gamers while Nintendo just stuck to kids and hardcore gamers.

[A Black Falcon]

So you finally admit that Nintendo's target audience for the GBA isn't adults. And that last line of yours doesn't make even a tiny bit of sense. "Trying to attract a market that isn't particularly drawn to an established console"... uh, that's kind of the point of the word "attract". You get people who aren't already playing the games to come to the system, since attracting people who already have Gameboys is kind of a stupid thing to do. You want to get the people who don't already have a Gameboy to buy one.

I don't really know, that's why it sounds confused...

'finally admit'? Huh? Of course the GBA's target market isn't adults! When did I say differently? There is a side market of specific older gamers, but not most mainstream ones... I do think I've said that before... only older Nintendo fans and people who like 2d games would really like GBA games, I'd think.

And that's why I expect to see Nintendo repeat similar mistakes with their next handheld as they did with the N64/GC.

Unfortunately, they well might. :(

That's because it wasn't until Mortal Kombat 2 came out that Nintendo started to allow real violence in their games, so everything before that was kid-friendly. There were a whole bunch of violent games available for the 2600 (like like Custer game where you rape Indians... seriously), so technology isn't what kept Nintendo from releasing violent games on the Gameboys.

True. But GBA seems to be aiming slightly older than previous GB's...not enough to make a big difference, though.

Are you kidding me? Why do you think that when the PS2 first came out most people bought DVDs instead of games? While it was bad for Sony at first since they lost money per PS2 shipped, it gave the system an enourmous userbase so when the good games started rolling in they sold extremely well. The whole DVD player debate was very popular during the X-Box and GC launch, in case you forgot. I can't even remember how many people I saw in Babbages and Best Buy ask "which system can play DVD movies?" and bought them because of that.

Yeah, yeah... but I still think it was a good decision. It kept piracy off the Cube (there still is very nearly no GC piracy as far as I know), since going through the DVD was a major exploitation... and it also kept the price down. The biggest problems with the Cube, I'd say, were innefective and not enough marketing and the system design...

You're missing the point. The GBA technology will be far more inferior to the PSP than the SNES was to the PSX, so that evens things out. At the end of the SNES' lifespan Nintendo was king of the market. And remember that Sony didn't become insanely popular until around the time FFVII came out, so the Sony that fought against the SNES was not popular at the time. I'd also like to remind you that the first generation of PSX games looked like crap, so it wasn't that big of a leap over the previous CD systems that came out.

I would not say that Nintendo was king of the market. Were they #1? Yes. But it wasn't totally dominant, as there were lots of other platforms out that had fanbases... a very different story from handhelds where the Game Boy has controlled the entire industry since 1989...

True, the PSP will definitely be a bigger step up than the PSX was from the SNES. And yes, Sony wasn't insanely popular until they got FF...which should be a point for my side! Unless the PSP gets major publishers to move over exclusively and drop the next Nintendo console as well as the GBA, they'll have a pretty hard time taking over...

It sounds similar because it is, you dolt! And do you know what else is different? Nintendo isn't half as popular today as they were ten years ago. Also, the generation gap between the GBA and PSP will be over twice as large as the gap between the SNES and the PSX, no doubt about it.

True, but the GB name is as dominant as ever... maybe more so, with the release of the GBA-SP...

That's Japan, and that was back when Nintendo was the most popular gaming company in the world. They're not the most popular anymore. It's not just time that Nintendo has to worry about, it's also the capabilities of their next handheld. Sony is clearly going to target an older, mainstream audience and because of that Sony can make their handheld more expensive than the GBA. I really don't know if Nintendo is going to do that. It's probably going to end up much like the PSX/N64 war where Sony got ahead by attracting adults and non-gamers while Nintendo just stuck to kids and hardcore gamers.

Their only chance is if they get some huge exclusive games, keep manufacturers off the next GB, and use their huge marketing machine to gain share... but even then it won't be easy. Nintendo is hardly going to give up its prize posession (handheld control) without a fight...

[OB1]

I don't really know, that's why it sounds confused...

'finally admit'? Huh? Of course the GBA's target market isn't adults! When did I say differently? There is a side market of specific older gamers, but not most mainstream ones... I do think I've said that before... only older Nintendo fans and people who like 2d games would really like GBA games, I'd think.

When I said that the Gameboy was targeted towards kids you tried to deny that.

Unfortunately, they well might.

Waitaminute... this entire time you've been disagreeing with me on that, and now you're turning around? Wha?

True. But GBA seems to be aiming slightly older than previous GB's...not enough to make a big difference, though.

Look at how long it took them to decide to release Fire Emblem, a decidedly more mature Nintendo RPG.

Yeah, yeah... but I still think it was a good decision. It kept piracy off the Cube (there still is very nearly no GC piracy as far as I know), since going through the DVD was a major exploitation... and it also kept the price down. The biggest problems with the Cube, I'd say, were ineffective and not enough marketing and the system design...

That was the number one problem, certainly, but the whole DVD thing certainly didn't help them. It did prevent piracy but it also put them behind Sony and MS.

I would not say that Nintendo was king of the market. Were they #1? Yes. But it wasn't totally dominant, as there were lots of other platforms out that had fan bases... a very different story from handhelds where the Game Boy has controlled the entire industry since 1989...

During the last few years of the SNES, Nintendo was definitely far ahead of Sega and anyone else, if I remember correctly. The Genesis was the SNES' only competition and Sega really alienated a lot of their fans with the Sega CD and 32X.

True, the PSP will definitely be a bigger step up than the PSX was from the SNES. And yes, Sony wasn't insanely popular until they got FF...which should be a point for my side! Unless the PSP gets major publishers to move over exclusively and drop the next Nintendo console as well as the GBA, they'll have a pretty hard time taking over...

No no, that's not what I meant. The PlayStation brand itself wasn't popular until FF VII came out, which is why the PS2 sold like mad at launch even though it didn't have one single AAA title available. The PlayStation name today is even more popular than 'Nintendo' was back in the 80's and early 90's. Sony is going to sell PSPs based off the name alone, and I'm certain that they'll have at least one system seller available at or around the time it comes out. All they really need is a new FF or GTA to make everyone want one.

True, but the GB name is as dominant as ever... maybe more so, with the release of the GBA-SP...

But bigger than the PlayStation name? Hmm, I don't think so.

Their only chance is if they get some huge exclusive games, keep manufacturers off the next GB, and use their huge marketing machine to gain share... but even then it won't be easy. Nintendo is hardly going to give up its prize possession (handheld control) without a fight...

As Nintendo has shown, their fighting skills aren't as good as Sony's. You can count on Sony having better marketing, plenty of good exclusive games, and at least a few big publishers pledging almost-exclusive support (EA comes to mind).

[A Black Falcon]

When I said that the Gameboy was targeted towards kids you tried to deny that.

Not really, I said the main audience is clearly kids but there is definitely a older market there too. Not by any means anywhere near as big as the kids' market, but it does exist.

Waitaminute... this entire time you've been disagreeing with me on that, and now you're turning around? Wha?

Only on some things. Nintendo clearly has a LOT of work to do to fix their marketing, public image, and system design issues... but they are in a better situation here than they were for the GC or N64, by far... with the N64 they had a chance but blew it, but with the Cube it was just too little too late. With this new generation of portables they haven't fallen behind yet... so they still have a chance. Yes, they could get too arrogant, delay it a year, and release a vastly underpowered system that the third parties will ignore... but at this point I think Nintendo has learned its lesson, or at least it's learned some lessons.

Look at how long it took them to decide to release Fire Emblem, a decidedly more mature Nintendo RPG.

Good point, but at least they finally released it, something they never did on the NES or SNES...

That was the number one problem, certainly, but the whole DVD thing certainly didn't help them. It did prevent piracy but it also put them behind Sony and MS.

I don't think Nintendo cares much that they are in last, so it wasn't a bad move at all...

During the last few years of the SNES, Nintendo was definitely far ahead of Sega and anyone else, if I remember correctly. The Genesis was the SNES' only competition and Sega really alienated a lot of their fans with the Sega CD and 32X.

It wasn't that dramatic. The Genesis won decisively in the early years in the US... it was only in the last years of the 16 bit generation that Nintendo caught them, and even then they barely pulled off a victory from what I remember... Nintendo did win worldwide, but that was mostly because of how badly the Genesis failed in Japan.

But bigger than the PlayStation name? Hmm, I don't think so.

But much bigger than Gamecube. And among children, its probably almost as big as Playstation...

No no, that's not what I meant. The PlayStation brand itself wasn't popular until FF VII came out, which is why the PS2 sold like mad at launch even though it didn't have one single AAA title available. The PlayStation name today is even more popular than 'Nintendo' was back in the 80's and early 90's. Sony is going to sell PSPs based off the name alone, and I'm certain that they'll have at least one system seller available at or around the time it comes out. All they really need is a new FF or GTA to make everyone want one.

Sure, it'll sell a lot of systems, but while Nintendo is down in the overall market they aren't out. And there IS a point to the thing that the PSP isn't aiming at GB owners much... it is some, but not a lot. At least not for quite some time after its release... not with the much older average-gamer focus and mass-market approach...

Yes, the Playstation name will win it many converts. True. And it might do quite well because of that name, sure... but you just rule out Nintendo more than you should.

[OB1]

Not really, I said the main audience is clearly kids but there is definitely a older market there too. Not by any means anywhere near as big as the kids' market, but it does exist.

Mainly just the Nintendo faithful.

Only on some things. Nintendo clearly has a LOT of work to do to fix their marketing, public image, and system design issues... but they are in a better situation here than they were for the GC or N64, by far... with the N64 they had a chance but blew it, but with the Cube it was just too little too late. With this new generation of portables they haven't fallen behind yet... so they still have a chance. Yes, they could get too arrogant, delay it a year, and release a vastly underpowered system that the third parties will ignore... but at this point I think Nintendo has learned its lesson, or at least it's learned some lessons.

I hope that's true but I'm not going to get my hopes up. Better to be pleasantly surprised than let down, I say.

Good point, but at least they finally released it, something they never did on the NES or SNES...

Yeah they gradually get smarter and smarter but it takes them soooo long. They still haven't announced any plans to release EB1&2 or the superb-looking Magical Vacation(which has been out for over a year in Japan) in the states. Nintendo is too afraid of taking risks.

I don't think Nintendo cares much that they are in last, so it wasn't a bad move at all...

You don't think they care? I certainly hope that they care!

It wasn't that dramatic. The Genesis won decisively in the early years in the US... it was only in the last years of the 16 bit generation that Nintendo caught them, and even then they barely pulled off a victory from what I remember... Nintendo did win worldwide, but that was mostly because of how badly the Genesis failed in Japan.

The Genesis was never far ahead of the SNES in terms of sales. When Mortal Kombat came out and Nintendo decided to edit their version of the game Sega certainly got a nice boost, but near the end of the SNES' life Nintendo was definitely on top. Sega's downfall began with the Sega CD.

But much bigger than Gamecube. And among children, its probably almost as big as Playstation...

Well the Gamecube name doesn't mean much, it's 'Nintendo' that sells systems.

The Gameboy name is probably almost as big as the Playstation name among children, but that's not the largest percentage of the video game market. Adults buy the most games now, and if Nintendo doesn't aggressively target their next handheld towards adults then they're gonna be in big trouble.

Sure, it'll sell a lot of systems, but while Nintendo is down in the overall market they aren't out. And there IS a point to the thing that the PSP isn't aiming at GB owners much... it is some, but not a lot. At least not for quite some time after its release... not with the much older average-gamer focus and mass-market approach...

Yes, the Playstation name will win it many converts. True. And it might do quite well because of that name, sure... but you just rule out Nintendo more than you should.

The PSP is going to be successful because Sony will be targeting the PSP towards adults and the mainstream, the same thing they did with the PSX and PS2. Don't forget that kids also love the Playstation because kids like to play the same things that their older siblings/role models play. Although I doubt that the PSP will sell as many units to kids as the GBA since it will be a lot more expensive than the GBA.

If Nintendo continues to target children but also adults then they have a good change of staying at #1 in the handheld market. They've been trying that with the Gamecube but with very little success, so I don't know if they'll be able to pull it off. Of course they didn't try to target adults until later on in the GC's life so it was a bit too late, but you know...

[A Black Falcon]

Mainly just the Nintendo faithful.

True, though not only, because of the large number of RPGs... Nintendo fans aren't exactly the only ones who like those. :)

I hope that's true but I'm not going to get my hopes up. Better to be pleasantly surprised than let down, I say.

Pessimism is just fine, but sometimes you can go too far...

You don't think they care? I certainly hope that they care!

Its quite obvious that they don't care as much as their competitors do.

Yeah they gradually get smarter and smarter but it takes them soooo long. They still haven't announced any plans to release EB1&2 or the superb-looking Magical Vacation(which has been out for over a year in Japan) in the states. Nintendo is too afraid of taking risks.

But this is Nintendo, just about the least risk-taking company in the world... they go too far too often. :(

The Genesis was never far ahead of the SNES in terms of sales. When Mortal Kombat came out and Nintendo decided to edit their version of the game Sega certainly got a nice boost, but near the end of the SNES' life Nintendo was definitely on top. Sega's downfall began with the Sega CD.

Remember, Genesis came out well before the SNES... like a year before. In that time it built up a good lead... and held it for quite some time. I am sure that I've read that for years after its release the SNES was behind, at least in the US... it started out way back but gained ground steadily, especially as Sega's mistakes mounted.

Well the Gamecube name doesn't mean much, it's 'Nintendo' that sells systems.

The Gameboy name is probably almost as big as the Playstation name among children, but that's not the largest percentage of the video game market. Adults buy the most games now, and if Nintendo doesn't aggressively target their next handheld towards adults then they're gonna be in big trouble.

That is true, but on the other hand they need to keep that children's market... without it Nintendo would be in serious trouble. They'd need to find a way to attract the mass-market consumer, something they haven't had success at in many years... so yes, they must diversify. But not at the cost of losing that base that sells most of their consoles... it may not be the majority of the market anymore, but it is a big part. They just need to find a way to attract adults too without losing the younger market... they could do it if they do it right. I certainly hope so.

Oh, and a more powerful console should help with the adult market... I know that power isn't everything, but people these days like nice 3d graphics so much... :(

The PSP is going to be successful because Sony will be targeting the PSP towards adults and the mainstream, the same thing they did with the PSX and PS2. Don't forget that kids also love the Playstation because kids like to play the same things that their older siblings/role models play. Although I doubt that the PSP will sell as many units to kids as the GBA since it will be a lot more expensive than the GBA.

If Nintendo continues to target children but also adults then they have a good change of staying at #1 in the handheld market. They've been trying that with the Gamecube but with very little success, so I don't know if they'll be able to pull it off. Of course they didn't try to target adults until later on in the GC's life so it was a bit too late, but you know...

By the time it comes out you'll probably be able to buy four or five GBA's and almost as many GBA SPs for the price of a PSP... that will pretty much kill much adoption from children. Not many parents buy $300 consoles for their kids... not when what they have is still 'perfectly good'... but yes, in the adult market they should do much better. I'm not sure how well, but just by force of marketing it should work among gamers... I don't see it making people switch from cellphone games to PSPs or anything, though.



Oh, and what about the PSP's layout? Analog stick, D-Pad, 4 face buttons (X, Square, Circle, Triangle), 2 shoulder buttons (L and R)), Start, and Select... that's 8 buttons, unless the analog stick is clickable (didn't mention it so I doubt it). That's fewer buttons than a PSX or PS2 so just like with GB ports would need to be reworked... but you can only fit so many buttons on a portable and have it remain portable.

[OB1]

True, though not only, because of the large number of RPGs... Nintendo fans aren't exactly the only ones who like those.

Whaaa?? Why do you think so many flocked to the PSX??

Pessimism is just fine, but sometimes you can go too far...

I'm looking at this from a very unbiased and realistic viewpoint. Perhaps a tad bit pessimistic, but this is Nintendo we're talking about.

Its quite obvious that they don't care as much as their competitors do.

I don't think it's about not caring, just that Nintendo is like a grumpy old man who thinks that his way is the only way and refuses to change with the times.

But this is Nintendo, just about the least risk-taking company in the world... they go too far too often.

Wasn't Iwata supposed to change all of this? They need new blood at NOA since they're the ones that decide which games get brought over here (I think).

Remember, Genesis came out well before the SNES... like a year before. In that time it built up a good lead... and held it for quite some time. I am sure that I've read that for years after its release the SNES was behind, at least in the US... it started out way back but gained ground steadily, especially as Sega's mistakes mounted.

Nah, it didn't take long for Nintendo to catch up with Sega and eventually get ahead of them.

That is true, but on the other hand they need to keep that children's market... without it Nintendo would be in serious trouble. They'd need to find a way to attract the mass-market consumer, something they haven't had success at in many years... so yes, they must diversify. But not at the cost of losing that base that sells most of their consoles... it may not be the majority of the market anymore, but it is a big part. They just need to find a way to attract adults too without losing the younger market... they could do it if they do it right. I certainly hope so.

Oh, and a more powerful console should help with the adult market... I know that power isn't everything, but people these days like nice 3d graphics so much...

The GC is more powerful than the PS2 and for a long time the GC had the best-looking games out of all three systems, yet it didn't help Nintendo. It's all about hype and marketing.

By the time it comes out you'll probably be able to buy four or five GBA's and almost as many GBA SPs for the price of a PSP... that will pretty much kill much adoption from children. Not many parents buy $300 consoles for their kids... not when what they have is still 'perfectly good'... but yes, in the adult market they should do much better. I'm not sure how well, but just by force of marketing it should work among gamers... I don't see it making people switch from cellphone games to PSPs or anything, though.

Well parents bought their kids PS2s which was $300. And who says that people will switch from cell phones to PSPs? What I said before was that portable electronics are very popular amongst adults.

Oh, and what about the PSP's layout? Analog stick, D-Pad, 4 face buttons (X, Square, Circle, Triangle), 2 shoulder buttons (L and R)), Start, and Select... that's 8 buttons, unless the analog stick is clickable (didn't mention it so I doubt it). That's fewer buttons than a PSX or PS2 so just like with GB ports would need to be reworked... but you can only fit so many buttons on a portable and have it remain portable.

That's a perfect amount of buttons for a handheld. Not many PSX/PS2 games use all of the buttons so it shouldn't be difficult to get around. And perhaps it will discourage non-stop porting, which is a good thing.

[A Black Falcon]

Whaaa?? Why do you think so many flocked to the PSX??

That was NON-SERIOUS. Read it again... I said that the GBA has lots of RPGs and thus it has a larger audience of older gamers than just Nintendo fans!

... they just need to like 2d gaming.

I thought that that comment was pretty clear...

I'm looking at this from a very unbiased and realistic viewpoint. Perhaps a tad bit pessimistic, but this is Nintendo we're talking about.

Tad bit? Even for Nintendo you're looking on the blackest side of the bad end...

I don't think it's about not caring, just that Nintendo is like a grumpy old man who thinks that his way is the only way and refuses to change with the times.

They need to wake up and realize that doing things for maximum short-term profits isn't always the best way to go.

Wasn't Iwata supposed to change all of this? They need new blood at NOA since they're the ones that decide which games get brought over here (I think).

Somewhat, I think he has... but he's still a long-term Nintendo man...

Nah, it didn't take long for Nintendo to catch up with Sega and eventually get ahead of them.

I'm pretty sure that it was longer than you think.

The GC is more powerful than the PS2 and for a long time the GC had the best-looking games out of all three systems, yet it didn't help Nintendo. It's all about hype and marketing.

Well yeah, but the PSP to GBA graphical difference is a bit bigger than GC to PS2... :)

Well parents bought their kids PS2s which was $300. And who says that people will switch from cell phones to PSPs? What I said before was that portable electronics are very popular amongst adults.

Sure, but at that time any consoles they had already were pretty old and dying... which is different from the situation with the GB... and remember, people view portables as something that should be cheaper. Because so far they have been...

Oh, and I said that because if you are going to say adults like portable electronic games then you are saying that they'll go to playing consoles instead of games on other things... which isn't as obvious a jump for people to make (quickly, for sure) as you imply.

That's a perfect amount of buttons for a handheld. Not many PSX/PS2 games use all of the buttons so it shouldn't be difficult to get around. And perhaps it will discourage non-stop porting, which is a good thing.

Yeah, I think its a good number of buttons too. Just interesting that after Nintendo gets bashed for leaving 2 buttons off the GBA Sony leaves even more off their system, that's all... though I do think that it doesn't really need more than 8 or so.