Game Boy Advance 2 set to stun E3 – DS to evolve into PDA
> News Comments > SPOnG Comments Index
Topic started: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 19:38
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Click here to view the news article this topic refers to.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:55
Adam M wrote:
Interestingly, GI claim to have industrial sources inside Nintendo that rubbish SPoNG's report. Tit for tat.
Yeah, but if you compare GI's story with the press release that Nintendo released yesterday, it's clear that they just re-wrote the press release. I'm not saying that they do not have contacts at Nintendo - they clearly do, but in this case, Nintendo are still formulating their story - and no-one is saying too much.
As you state, all will be revealed at E3. SPoNG, having not presented this as a rumour, obviously have considerable confidence in their article. I think a lot of regulars would be disappointed if SPoNG did begin publishing rumour as fact.
You have to bear in mind, however, that we are dealing with a chaotic system here. The fact that we have released this information could (theoretically, I'm not saying it will) create a wave of outcry so extensive that it leads Nintendo to re-consider, and to alter their strategy. If this were to happen, we would immediately be criticised for "making stuff up". This always makes it difficult to decide what to print and what not to. And that's is why most sites wait until there is an official press release, and then just re-write that.
Having not read the source article, but from the reports I've read and analyst's reputation, I would say that his report is fundamentally flawed in terms that it places heavy reliance on a 2 year release pattern in recent years.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. JP McNealy's article had no influence whatsoever on our story. Our sources are different, and what we are saying is different.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:57
stewartc500 wrote:
I don't see Gamecube quality graphics on anything the size of a GBA SP I'm sorry, I just don't believe it, so if it happens, well then that'll be something unbelievable won't it?
Why not? This is not the '70s. PSP is very nearly comparable to PS2 and, for the last 2 generations, Nintendo machines have been considerably more powerful than their respective Sony-made counterparts. Considering this is likely to be the most important console release in Nintendo's history, it's not unreasonable to expect this level of performance.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:24
You have to bear in mind, however, that we are dealing with a chaotic system here. The fact that we have released this information could (theoretically, I'm not saying it will) create a wave of outcry so extensive that it leads Nintendo to re-consider, and to alter their strategy. If this were to happen, we would immediately be criticised for "making stuff up". This always makes it difficult to decide what to print and what not to. And that's is why most sites wait until there is an official press release, and then just re-write that.
Is this a hint of a backtrack of the story from spong? If it does turn out to be false will spong claim Nintendo changed their strategy because of this very article?
Is this a hint of a backtrack of the story from spong? If it does turn out to be false will spong claim Nintendo changed their strategy because of this very article?
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:30
richardjamesparker wrote:
Is this a hint of a backtrack of the story from spong? If it does turn out to be false will spong claim Nintendo changed their strategy because of this very article?
No, it's a statement of real facts, for people to consider in a reasonable manner to help them draw logical conclusions.
On the other hand, you could take them at surface value, without any kind of analysis and assume that they represent a backtrack (even though none was hinted at). Whatever!
I'm not suggesting that Nintendo would (or could afford to) reconsider the launch schedule of GBA2, but they might re-consider how they treat DS after GBA2 arrives.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:34
Wonderful. I guess I'll be cancelling my DS order then. Roll on E3.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:45
DoctorDee wrote:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. JP McNealy's article had no influence whatsoever on our story. Our sources are different, and what we are saying is different.
I know. I made a slightly out-of-place comment intended for people that have been reading similar articles on other sites.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 14:57
It's much cheaper than making new hardware, getting people to buy it again, and sending out new development kits to game companies.. It just wouldn't make sense.
Ah ha, interesting you bought that up. I'd expect if GBA2 is based on GC tech there wpould be no need for new dev kits because everyone already has the GC ones. And with many having made GC games they already know what th system can do. This would keep things cheap in a similar regard that DS and iQue PLayer cannibalised N64 tech for some use again. In the same regard to the DS the tech is more or less N64 so with that in mind all the developers can concentrate on creating games to best use the DS features. Because the tech is known games can possibly be produced a little quicker for both.
My take on the whole Spong story credibility thing is like this. I believe the chaps at Spong because they say they have a good source. Now while we may all be taking this news with a pinch of salt compared to many sites out there Spong get thins right a lot of the time. You can'tfault a good news hound that hunts for news via sources as opposed to waiting for official news to drop in your lap all the time.
What I do find funny is the fact when Spong are right all other sites go quiet and never show a little respect to the crew like with a certain MS scoop they once had, which many didn't believe. Nobody's perfect so it's okay to wrong and correct yourself accordingly too. I believe the Spong crew on this news and time will tell us the truth soon.
Ah ha, interesting you bought that up. I'd expect if GBA2 is based on GC tech there wpould be no need for new dev kits because everyone already has the GC ones. And with many having made GC games they already know what th system can do. This would keep things cheap in a similar regard that DS and iQue PLayer cannibalised N64 tech for some use again. In the same regard to the DS the tech is more or less N64 so with that in mind all the developers can concentrate on creating games to best use the DS features. Because the tech is known games can possibly be produced a little quicker for both.
My take on the whole Spong story credibility thing is like this. I believe the chaps at Spong because they say they have a good source. Now while we may all be taking this news with a pinch of salt compared to many sites out there Spong get thins right a lot of the time. You can'tfault a good news hound that hunts for news via sources as opposed to waiting for official news to drop in your lap all the time.
What I do find funny is the fact when Spong are right all other sites go quiet and never show a little respect to the crew like with a certain MS scoop they once had, which many didn't believe. Nobody's perfect so it's okay to wrong and correct yourself accordingly too. I believe the Spong crew on this news and time will tell us the truth soon.
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:41
I get the feeling the DS will be used in a rather simple strategy, highlighted by both the inclusion of a GBA cart port and the ability to download games.
Taking these two as facts, the DS fills a simple gap: a step up for gamers who can't afford a handheld as expensive as the PSP or new GBA will undoubtedly be, and also still want to be able to re-use all their old games while at the same time gaining access to a whole new set. So, the DS becomes a machine not unlike Ninty's strategy in China with the N64 with downloadable games. The touch screen becomes a design feature, and opens it up as a communication device for schoolchildren etc.
Meanwhile, those people who want flashy graphics and multimedia get the Cube-in-their-hands GBA2, which on top of the amazing graphical power afforded by the TINY chipset in a Cube, can play other media (and, in a move to trump Sony, turns into a Robosapien-esque manservant at the flick of a switch-kidding) at the simple loss of compatability with the old GB range. That way, there's still a machine on the market that allows use of all the old games, while a new machine steals Sony's market.
At least, that makes sense to me. This being Nintendo, the strategy is probably way more complex and fallible than that.
Taking these two as facts, the DS fills a simple gap: a step up for gamers who can't afford a handheld as expensive as the PSP or new GBA will undoubtedly be, and also still want to be able to re-use all their old games while at the same time gaining access to a whole new set. So, the DS becomes a machine not unlike Ninty's strategy in China with the N64 with downloadable games. The touch screen becomes a design feature, and opens it up as a communication device for schoolchildren etc.
Meanwhile, those people who want flashy graphics and multimedia get the Cube-in-their-hands GBA2, which on top of the amazing graphical power afforded by the TINY chipset in a Cube, can play other media (and, in a move to trump Sony, turns into a Robosapien-esque manservant at the flick of a switch-kidding) at the simple loss of compatability with the old GB range. That way, there's still a machine on the market that allows use of all the old games, while a new machine steals Sony's market.
At least, that makes sense to me. This being Nintendo, the strategy is probably way more complex and fallible than that.
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 05:04
I've read a lot of reactions to this "news". There appears to be a lot of over-reaction here to what is, basically, speculation. So, if the DS gains PDA capabilities, how does that alter the games that are unique to the device? The control system is unique among game devices, the wirelessness has a lot of untapped potential for viral, competitive and collector-type games. The DS is a gaming device... but if it can do other stuff too, great. I don't think it's going to "focus" on being a PDA just because it has some PDA tools.
Nintendo has never implied the DS is a Gameboy. They've stated the opposite, in fact. I didn't buy my DS expecting it only to play games, I wanted it to have some communications capability. Once I had it in my hands, I wanted to be able to use it to browse the web or check email. If the DS gets good PDA capabilities, I'm all over it. Until then, I will keep my DS for playing GBA games and the occasional good DS release like "Feel the Magic" or "Touched". Looking forward to "Atari Retro", "Electroplanckton" and "Animal Crossing".
Nintendo has never implied the DS is a Gameboy. They've stated the opposite, in fact. I didn't buy my DS expecting it only to play games, I wanted it to have some communications capability. Once I had it in my hands, I wanted to be able to use it to browse the web or check email. If the DS gets good PDA capabilities, I'm all over it. Until then, I will keep my DS for playing GBA games and the occasional good DS release like "Feel the Magic" or "Touched". Looking forward to "Atari Retro", "Electroplanckton" and "Animal Crossing".
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 08:05
oed wrote:
So, if the DS gains PDA capabilities, how does that alter the games that are unique to the device?
In the way that companies will stop making them.
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 09:08
I don't think I understand your argument, or it doesn't make sense. Are you saying that because the DS will have some software to be a PDA, companies won't make games for it?
The DS provides a unique platform for game development and is primarily a gaming device. I don't think giving the DS some PDA software is going to have any adverse effects on games developed for the system. I think the opposite is true. If the PDA aspects are good, it will sell even more units, giving software developers an even wider base of users at whom to market games.
The DS provides a unique platform for game development and is primarily a gaming device. I don't think giving the DS some PDA software is going to have any adverse effects on games developed for the system. I think the opposite is true. If the PDA aspects are good, it will sell even more units, giving software developers an even wider base of users at whom to market games.
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 13:44
oed wrote:
The DS provides a unique platform for game development and is primarily a gaming device. I don't think giving the DS some PDA software is going to have any adverse effects on games developed for the system. I think the opposite is true. If the PDA aspects are good, it will sell even more units, giving software developers an even wider base of users at whom to market games.
The DS's unique points will be what kills it as far as games are concerned. Publishers are less and less willing to take risks on games.
If the GBA2 will be GC compatible and given that the PSP is very close to the capabilities of the PS2, publishers will see the ability to publish two basic versions of games as very enticing.
There will be the high end PS3/XBox2/Revolution version and the PS2/PSP/XBox/GC/GBA2 version.
Middleware will iron out the differences between the individual hardware platforms and the control methods will all be basically the same mix of analogue stick, D-pad, 4 buttons and shoulder buttons/triggers that we know now.
Each platform, except maybe the PS2 and GC, will have online capabilities, either through a fixed connection for the consoles or through wi-fi for the handhelds.
The hard part of each game, the game design, will be the same across every version. The only things that will change will be the graphics and sound, taken care of by production pipeline software and middleware.
The DS will be left out in the cold as an experimental machine, fewer and fewer games will be released for it since publishers will see the increased development costs as more important than the "art" of the games it makes possible.
The only thing that may change the above will be if the Revolution has a distinctly different control scheme, in which case it will fall by the wayside too.
I'm sorry that this seems to inevitable, but just look to the cinema to see why. IMAX gives such a richer experience to audiences that all films should be released that way, but the costs are prohibitive. The screens are so large, there are many fewer than normal sized ones, so the audience is smaller, so the risk is greater so there are fewer films released for the format.
The DS is the IMAX of the computer games world. It is just different enough to be ignored. Nintendo's PDA software is an admission of this fact since it is offering an alternative use for the DS than just games, a safety blanket for those that have already bought one.
One thing I do need to point out though, I've finally seen a DS TV advert. If I didn't already know the name Nintendo, I'd have no idea what it was about, if I had a slight knowledge I might think it was a Cube or GBA add-on. Nintendo are, again, marketing to those that already know. Not good.
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:47
Your points are taken, but I don't quite agree with your analogies. I don't think the DS has to dominate the market to thrive as a platform. The PS dominates the market now and it is the system I play least (though it has some good games). Of course there are a companies who won't take the "risk" to release inventive games... but there are few games that I want to play that are designed for commercial reasons alone. For example, most movie tie-in games are quick grabs for cash with formulaic and rushed productions. On the other hand, "Katamari Damacy" was "arty" and "uncommercial" by most standards, but it was one of the best games to come out last year (in my humble opinion).
Lest I be accused of painting a rosy picture of Nintendo, I think most GBA games are rubbish. Many of the DS games out now are rubbish as well. But there are bright lights on the horizon, and the PDA software potential is one of those lights.
Sounds as if your DoomSpeak about the DS is based on its very architecture and not the news about the PDA functionality... the latter of which I thought we were discussing.
DS is not easy to develop for, and that may be its downfall. In the meantime, at least we get to experience games in a cool new way.
Lest I be accused of painting a rosy picture of Nintendo, I think most GBA games are rubbish. Many of the DS games out now are rubbish as well. But there are bright lights on the horizon, and the PDA software potential is one of those lights.
Sounds as if your DoomSpeak about the DS is based on its very architecture and not the news about the PDA functionality... the latter of which I thought we were discussing.
DS is not easy to develop for, and that may be its downfall. In the meantime, at least we get to experience games in a cool new way.
Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:51
Tyrion's got it all summed up very well. I'll add my own thoughts (shamelessly stolen from my own blog, but still valid in terms of recent discussion):
What does all this mean? Basically, it's all very experimental and if I don't see more companies taking advantage of that fully soon, I'll spend my money on something else.
Nik, a week ago wrote:
Recently we've been inundated with new ways to play games. Dance mats, bongos, maracas, light sensors, fishing rods - all have redefined the input for a game. Some have been successful, others haven't. The main problem with this kind of thing of course, is that many of these have very specific functions based on their novelty appeal, as have older examples of the specialised peripheral such as lightguns or steering wheels. All the peripherals I've listed have been compatible with few games. Enter the Nintendo approach.
Nintendo's as guilty as most when it comes to novelty controllers, of course. The bongos are a shining example of this. However, more recently they've taken a "blank canvas" approach. A lightgun can play gun games. A Game Boy Advance can play anything you want as long as it's within the system's power - something Nintendo has utilised for Zelda: Four Swords, Squaresoft for Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Namco for Pac-Man Vs. and Sega for Billy Hatcher. All perform very different functions. Of course, the problem with the GBA link was that it cost money - a GBA plus connection cable is not a small investment for what is often a trivial enhancement. Third parties were understandably reluctant to get in on the action, especially after a Nintendo Official Magazine UK poll found that three quarters of the fans didn't care anyway. Even the most successful console add-ons (such as online play, Xbox Live in all it's glory hasn't even topped 2 million customers) aren't that successful. Simply put, required peripherals are often a barrier between the game and success. Enter the revised Nintendo approach.
By including the non-standard features in the basic system, Nintendo is hoping to shove other software houses down it's path of experimentalist development, to offer something truly different and win back their once-loyal fanbase. In a way, it's working. Sega has created Project Rub, and Namco's got Pac-Pix. Here's the issue: those are the same developers that tried the new things anyway. Sega was the first company to use the GBA link to GC, the first to use the DS-GBA intercompatibility, the only company to make an online Gamecube game. Namco utilised the Dreamcast fishing rod and microphone in games that weren't about fishing and didn't require voice control, purely for the hell of it.
Companies like EA, however, are content to offer ports of GBA titles such as The Urbz with mundane extra functionality offered by the touch-screen. Put simply, most developers aren't Namco, Sega or Nintendo. They don't have the imagination to pull it off. Even companies as inventive as Sega are having a hard time turning blank canvas features into fully-fledged games, as the likes of Sega Superstars and Project Rub will show. Nintendo used the features to add mini-games, and as a poor substitute for analogue control. I'm not paying £99 for a system based around mini-games, even though the one I played today was fun.
The other problem is that in the past, peripherals have been prohibitively expensive, which put consumers off. Not any more. The bongos, the EyeToy and other peripherals have been included with the software at an RRP equal to that of regular software; a far cry from the days of Samba de Amigo. There's also the fact that a dedicated peripheral included at no extra cost offers an experience that is equal to (if not better than) workarounds like a touchscreen; Mercury on the PSP is easily as inventive as anything on the DS.
Nintendo's as guilty as most when it comes to novelty controllers, of course. The bongos are a shining example of this. However, more recently they've taken a "blank canvas" approach. A lightgun can play gun games. A Game Boy Advance can play anything you want as long as it's within the system's power - something Nintendo has utilised for Zelda: Four Swords, Squaresoft for Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Namco for Pac-Man Vs. and Sega for Billy Hatcher. All perform very different functions. Of course, the problem with the GBA link was that it cost money - a GBA plus connection cable is not a small investment for what is often a trivial enhancement. Third parties were understandably reluctant to get in on the action, especially after a Nintendo Official Magazine UK poll found that three quarters of the fans didn't care anyway. Even the most successful console add-ons (such as online play, Xbox Live in all it's glory hasn't even topped 2 million customers) aren't that successful. Simply put, required peripherals are often a barrier between the game and success. Enter the revised Nintendo approach.
By including the non-standard features in the basic system, Nintendo is hoping to shove other software houses down it's path of experimentalist development, to offer something truly different and win back their once-loyal fanbase. In a way, it's working. Sega has created Project Rub, and Namco's got Pac-Pix. Here's the issue: those are the same developers that tried the new things anyway. Sega was the first company to use the GBA link to GC, the first to use the DS-GBA intercompatibility, the only company to make an online Gamecube game. Namco utilised the Dreamcast fishing rod and microphone in games that weren't about fishing and didn't require voice control, purely for the hell of it.
Companies like EA, however, are content to offer ports of GBA titles such as The Urbz with mundane extra functionality offered by the touch-screen. Put simply, most developers aren't Namco, Sega or Nintendo. They don't have the imagination to pull it off. Even companies as inventive as Sega are having a hard time turning blank canvas features into fully-fledged games, as the likes of Sega Superstars and Project Rub will show. Nintendo used the features to add mini-games, and as a poor substitute for analogue control. I'm not paying £99 for a system based around mini-games, even though the one I played today was fun.
The other problem is that in the past, peripherals have been prohibitively expensive, which put consumers off. Not any more. The bongos, the EyeToy and other peripherals have been included with the software at an RRP equal to that of regular software; a far cry from the days of Samba de Amigo. There's also the fact that a dedicated peripheral included at no extra cost offers an experience that is equal to (if not better than) workarounds like a touchscreen; Mercury on the PSP is easily as inventive as anything on the DS.
What does all this mean? Basically, it's all very experimental and if I don't see more companies taking advantage of that fully soon, I'll spend my money on something else.
Log-in or register to permanently change your layout setting.
1 comments
I believe that this story has some major parts missing to it. No company that develops ANY product would come out with a model in 4Q 04, and announce a successor 2Q, 05. It just isn't done, that's how you lose money as a company, not gain it. If Nintendo needed to compete with the PSP, they would have just announced the GBA2 at this point now.
Don't forget, the DS is doing really really well in the US, already selling more than 2.5 million units, why wouldn't they just continue to make games for a sucessful system? It's much cheaper than making new hardware, getting people to buy it again, and sending out new development kits to game companies.. It just wouldn't make sense.
I believe something crazy is going to go down at E3 this year. I think Nintendo is sick and tired of being stepped on by big companies Sony and Microsoft, and want to take back the market that used to be theirs. Should be interesting to say the least.