14th September 2005, 6:58 AM
Having one (16:9 vertical) screen with two CPU's to control the split would be a bitch to program for. It can be done, yes. But when you factor that in to one giant touch screen you wouldn't have a launch at $150.
Yes, everything I mentioned can be done on one screen, but you'd be playing on a 300+ system that would be difficult to program for. Now, what I want to see is developers doing the kind of stuff i'm thinking of.
Also, to a much smaller extent, the idea of one touch screen and one 'viewing' screen is a good limiter that keeps developers focused as well as the actual game player. If both 'sides' were touch sensitive people would get confused very quickly; I already watch people tap both screens in frustration until they realize that the bottom screen is a touch screen. Once they discover that, it becomes really conducive and fun for them. If you had one giant touch screen, people would never know when you can touch something and when you cant.
Yes, everything I mentioned can be done on one screen, but you'd be playing on a 300+ system that would be difficult to program for. Now, what I want to see is developers doing the kind of stuff i'm thinking of.
Also, to a much smaller extent, the idea of one touch screen and one 'viewing' screen is a good limiter that keeps developers focused as well as the actual game player. If both 'sides' were touch sensitive people would get confused very quickly; I already watch people tap both screens in frustration until they realize that the bottom screen is a touch screen. Once they discover that, it becomes really conducive and fun for them. If you had one giant touch screen, people would never know when you can touch something and when you cant.