14th September 2005, 3:01 PM
Ah the Micro... pathetic system. It's more expensive than an SP, right now, and does LESS. But, we've all raved on about how stupid that system is. Why didn't they just put a sharper screen on the SP anyway?
And, the idea that people would get "confused" if the whole thing was a touch screen sounds a bit too much like the mac user's excuse for that one button mouse. If only one part can be interacted with via touch, then it should be pretty apparent. "Oh, I guess they don't let you touch stuff in the menu", that's all. Plus, I'm pretty sure they would add touch features to all areas anyway given half a chance.
And lastly, difficult to program for eh? I can see that, but at the same time it wouldn't be that hard to get around in MOST situations so long as the system, or the dev kit programming software had a built in way to "split" an image that could just be "called" whenever it was needed. I ALSO said this before, but the system already has to be programmed to determine which image goes to which screen or, if the image is "linked", where the whole thing starts and ends (for example, the trampoline minigames in SM64DS). What I'm saying here is the challenge of splitting the image on one screen is pretty much identical to the challenge of splitting the image across two screens, what with programming languages being where they are now.
And, the idea that people would get "confused" if the whole thing was a touch screen sounds a bit too much like the mac user's excuse for that one button mouse. If only one part can be interacted with via touch, then it should be pretty apparent. "Oh, I guess they don't let you touch stuff in the menu", that's all. Plus, I'm pretty sure they would add touch features to all areas anyway given half a chance.
And lastly, difficult to program for eh? I can see that, but at the same time it wouldn't be that hard to get around in MOST situations so long as the system, or the dev kit programming software had a built in way to "split" an image that could just be "called" whenever it was needed. I ALSO said this before, but the system already has to be programmed to determine which image goes to which screen or, if the image is "linked", where the whole thing starts and ends (for example, the trampoline minigames in SM64DS). What I'm saying here is the challenge of splitting the image on one screen is pretty much identical to the challenge of splitting the image across two screens, what with programming languages being where they are now.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)