10th August 2003, 1:16 PM
Quote:Key word being "expensive". Even if they do use a better rechargeable battery all the things they have going [dual processors, DVD drive, larger screen] WILL take their toll on battery life, how much of a toll we'll just have to wait and see.
Key words being "Nintendo is cheap", actually. Nintendo rarely ever loses money per each piece of hardware that they sell because they make their consoles cheaper than Sony and MS do. Both Sony and MS lose money for each console that they sell (or at least Sony did in the first two years of the PS2's life). Sony is willing to lose more money than Nintendo is.
Quote:Nintendo says that they don't really see the PSP as direct competion, but there's no way that Nintendo is going to set back and watch Sony boot them out of their last stronghold. They're going to put out a handheld that's close to the specs of the PSP, but they might not use a disc-based medium, although they should.
Before the Gamecube launch Nintendo also said that they were not going to be directly competiting with the X-Box and PS2. Look how that turned out.
I see another N64 vs. PSX situation happening all over again. Nintendo has a stronghold over a particular market, Sony introduces a new system, everyone underestimates them, but all of the third-parties flock to Sony's system because Sony offers much lower licensing and production fees than Nintendo does. Unless Nintendo offers even lower licensing fees and has a new handheld that's just about as powerful as the PSP and comes out no later than a few months after the PSP, I'm afraid to say that Sony will probably dominate the handheld gaming market.
Quote:That is very, very close to the amount of time alkaline batteries last, you know... so no, I don't see any major changes there.
Well, unless the PSP makes you use Lithium batteries or something...
Sony makes some of the best, most efficient rechargable batteries in the world, so what do you think they'll use? And having a rechargable lithium battery pack isn't a huge improvement over having to spend tons of money on alkaline batteries each year? :erm2:
Quote:Just to say that it isn't absurd for someone to feel the opposite way, like I have about your positions (and mean it)... but I doubt THAT would happen.
Oh, and maybe explain some of it a bit better. Controls... do you mean the control scheme? Different, neither one is better than the other. The way the characters move? Speed is about the same, but BK has more moves than each individual character in DK64, while DK64 has more all together. Different styles there, sure. But I fail to see why splitting it up among multiple characters is so horrible...
As for the graphics you just don't make sense. I see no way BK looks better than DK64.
I provided screenshots that showed the drastic difference in graphics quality between the two games, I explained very clearly how the games differ in control and gameplay, and I've repeated myself at least a dozen times now. I will not repeat myself again. If you have that bad of a memory, read the last few pages of this argument. This is ridiculous.
Quote:Uhh... "the way they jump"? What in the WORLD do you mean there, because I don't see how they and BK have any difference other the fact that BK has a few more moves in its character than each indidual character in DK64 -- which doesn't effect jumping that dramatically... I just do not understand this arguement of yours.
The jumping in DK64 is very limited. None of the characters can jump very high, and because of that there are no challenging jumping puzzles. There are many more jumping puzzles in the Banjo games, and it's one thing that I sorely missed while playing through DK64.
Quote:Wow, I'm SO sorry for instead of boring myself to tears playing the same games over and over I went and played PC games after finishing or giving up on whatever my latest N64 game was... because, you see, that's what I've always done with my consoles. When I get a new game I play it a lot for a while, but then I finish it or get tired of it and stop playing it and go back to my PC.
So even if I had had a N64 in 1996, I somehow doubt that I'd have played any games twice. I'd have gone to play Warcraft.
Because to me its just not that fun to play games over and over when there are better alternatives. Or unless the game is short, fun, and designed for repeat play, like sidescrolling action games or good scrolling shooters...
Do you think I had a choice?? The only new system I had from 1996-2000 was an N64. The only games I could play were N64 ones, so I sucked the life out of them. I got very well acquainted with each major N64 release, so I have much more experience with them than you do, which is why I can tell the difference between the likes of Dk64 and BK and you cannot.