PSP2 CONFIRMED!!(?)

Disagreeing with you / proving you wrong is trolling?

Anyone who thinks graphics are an important part of a gaming experience might as well just go watch Pixar movies because that's all your really getting from games with superb graphics. A whole lot of cinematic and very little gameplay.

Thanks for your biased opinion, please enjoy your day!

I don't mock people when arguing with them.

To be honest, with the current days, if a game doesn't live up to the console's specs it's pretty retarded. Imagine a 3D game in the PS3 with awful graphics. Would you buy it? A WHOLE DIFFERENT issue is when the game actually attempts to go over that barrier, namely Scott Pilgrim for the PS3 for example.

I'm trying to be serious here, sir, stop being so blind!


Stop lying sir! And it already looks better, graphically, than a big chunk of PS2 games.

I don't doubt the PSP(name) has probably some pretty graphics but you can't say that pretty graphics, even if the games are terrible, are worth $300+

I put them in the same group, sorry for that, mind-slipped.

I don't lie, and I can argue that after going through the PSP's library looking for underrated gems, I've found a lot of games worth playing, it's not only graphics you get from the Sony handhelds.

Also, it doesn't look anywhere near PS2 graphics Chris, don't kid me.

MORE INFO!!!
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/01/2...y-details/

Oh, and stop hating. This looks AWESOME, and has LBP and Uncharted in it, so there's already 2 great games at launch (probably?). The only thing that can ruin it is price.

Software titles on small, dedicated flash memory-based cards

[SIZE="5"]ZOMFG THAT MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE TO DOWNLOAD GAMES FROM PSN?!?!?![/SIZE]

I don't mock people when arguing with them.

To be honest, with the current days, if a game doesn't live up to the console's specs it's pretty retarded. Imagine a 3D game in the PS3 with awful graphics. Would you buy it? A WHOLE DIFFERENT issue is when the game actually attempts to go over that barrier, namely Scott Pilgrim for the PS3 for example.

I was actually being serious. A large portion of games with good graphics are almost entirely cinematic with very little gameplay. Even one of your favourites, Crisis Core, is little more than a movie with some button pushes in between. A lot of button pushes, actually. But the game play has absolutely no depth. And too many games are like that these days. Even games that do have good gameplay have very little amounts of it between cinemas, like Metal Gear Solid 4.

And yes, I absolutely would pay (a reasonable amount) for a game if it doesn't meet the specs of the system, because I play games for more than just sparkle. The reason I love the DS is because of it's huge range of games with great gameplay but only mediocre graphics. Give me a 2D game over a 3D visual masterpiece any day. Hell, give me KH 358/2 over Crisis Core because at least it has evolving mechanics. The graphics might be pixelated and a little on the ugly side but at least it's a fun experience.

I was actually being serious. A large portion of games with good graphics are almost entirely cinematic with very little gameplay. Even one of your favourites, Crisis Core, is little more than a movie with some button pushes in between. A lot of button pushes, actually. But the game play has absolutely no depth. And too many games are like that these days. Even games that do have good gameplay have very little amounts of it between cinemas, like Metal Gear Solid 4.

And yes, I absolutely would pay (a reasonable amount) for a game if it doesn't meet the specs of the system, because I play games for more than just sparkle. The reason I love the DS is because of it's huge range of games with great gameplay but only mediocre graphics. Give me a 2D game over a 3D visual masterpiece any day. Hell, give me KH 358/2 over Crisis Core because at least it has evolving mechanics. The graphics might be pixelated and a little on the ugly side but at least it's a fun experience.

So you're the kind of people who would hate Heavy Rain? (though it doesn't have "excellent graphics")

I was actually being serious. A large portion of games with good graphics are almost entirely cinematic with very little gameplay. Even one of your favourites, Crisis Core, is little more than a movie with some button pushes in between. A lot of button pushes, actually. But the game play has absolutely no depth. And too many games are like that these days. Even games that do have good gameplay have very little amounts of it between cinemas, like Metal Gear Solid 4.

And yes, I absolutely would pay (a reasonable amount) for a game if it doesn't meet the specs of the system, because I play games for more than just sparkle. The reason I love the DS is because of it's huge range of games with great gameplay but only mediocre graphics. Give me a 2D game over a 3D visual masterpiece any day. Hell, give me KH 358/2 over Crisis Core because at least it has evolving mechanics. The graphics might be pixelated and a little on the ugly side but at least it's a fun experience.

I need a little more equilibrium than that sorry. Crisis Core was actually good for other things, but yes, the gameplay did became a little boring, actually when doing missions it became boring.

I wouldn't pay for a game that doesn't have an even level on many aspects, and that includes Music, Sound, Graphics, Story, Gameplay, Replayability and some more.

Mind you, I play a lot of games outside the RPG genre, and I would've never EVER paid for a musical game in the DS, for example (well, I probably would for Rhythm Heaven). The Taiko No Tatsujin series, for example, is a whole lot better in the PSP than in the DS.

Eh, as you stated from me before, I play a lot of retro games in emulators, and that should give you the hint that it's not the graphics, is the overall experience that doesn't cut it for me. Hell, the GBA was a better console than the DS in my opinion.

I don't lie, and I can argue that after going through the PSP's library looking for underrated gems, I've found a lot of games worth playing, it's not only graphics you get from the Sony handhelds.

Also, it doesn't look anywhere near PS2 graphics Chris, don't kid me.

I can make the same argument going through the DS's library.
You can't honestly say that the DS was a terrible system because it doesn't meet today's "graphic requirement." That's just being flat out ignorant.

The Kid Icarus trailer looks to be on-par with the PS2. It looks a LOT better than many of the early PS2 offerings, for two.
Also, should I bring up Tales of the Abyss 3DS? Just from one trailer and a few screenshots, it looks a lot cleaner than TotA for the PS2.

Also, Music/Rhythm games are hella funner on the DS than the PSP. There's just more interaction involved that makes it a better experience than your garden variety button presses.


And for the last time, I'm not saying the PSP didn't have good games. I'm just saying that the amount of good, original games on the PSP is a needle in a haystack comparison. It's a handheld PSX/2 emulator in retrospect.

More power = better AI, smoother gameplay, better physics, and more action on screen

3D = slightly prettier graphics

Sony is focusing on gameplay while Nintendo is focusing on graphics.

deal w/ it

I dont care about what games it will have on release date, the kinnect only had 5 games on release? It was selling like hot cakes and had a small library. To this day if i go in to best buy their sold out of the kinnect. Why are people buying it if their is hardly any games for it?

Price for this beauty will not be a problem. How much is an ipod touch 64g (4th gen)? It cost $300, all it does is apps and music. If people are willing to shell out $300+ for apple handheld products that are not game breaking, why wouldn't anyone buy this? Lets not forget it will also play as a smartphone and people do pay at least $500 just for one.


All i have to say to sony is

Also, Music/Rhythm games are hella funner on the DS than the PSP. There's just more interaction involved that makes it a better experience than your garden variety button presses.

nope almost all the ds music games are smash the bubble... the only innovation is rhythm heaven and it was originally for gba

Epic's Unreal Engine demo.

Looks great. Running a full 60FPS? Thats sick. They tried a similar demo on the iPhone and that ran at 10FPS.

Quit arguing about graphics between the PS2 and 3DS. Its a dumb comparison. PS2 could play games at up to 1080i [GT4]. 3DS' lol800x240 res doesn't even compare to the PS2's lowest output resolution [640x480]. Everything looks great that small. Even my mother's sagging teet could impress you at that low a res on a small screen.

The old psp graphics are good enough for me. The 3DS has these, plus 3d, so I'm good.
>Buying 3DS in hopes of a new 3d realtime action game (although I'm also buying it because I don't want to miss any normal pkmn games, or any other good ones. Hey, whens that tales of game in japan coming here?). :<
IT CAN HAPPEN!

More power = better AI, smoother gameplay, better physics, and more action on screen

3D = slightly prettier graphics

Sony is focusing on gameplay while Nintendo is focusing on graphics.

deal w/ it

That's because, even though I agree good graphics=/=good gameplay, nintendo needs to catch up in the graphics field. I think they're behind because a better processor=more costly. Nintendo targets a lot of people (like children and family) unlike Sony, and thus has to consider affordability.

@PSP2/NGP
Isn't that amazing. Not something to look forward to, nor is it memorable at the moment.

More power = better AI, smoother gameplay, better physics, and more action on screen

3D = slightly prettier graphics

Sony is focusing on gameplay while Nintendo is focusing on graphics.

deal w/ it

I dunno, with more powerful platform, you have devs concentrate a lot of energy on the graphics, in order to take advantage of all the power + not be outshined by competition. Though I agree, theoretically, with more power, you can have more going on.

As for the 3ds comment. o_O I think everyone saw that the 3DS would be less powerful than the PSP2. But I don't think that Nintendo has ever taken graphics over gameplay... And plus the Sony conference spent a lot of time showing off the graphical capabitily of the NGP and very little on actual gameplay innovation. Sure they had the rear touch screen, but I have a feeling it'll be a nightmare accuracy wise >.>

I dont care about what games it will have on release date, the kinnect only had 5 games on release? It was selling like hot cakes and had a small library. To this day if i go in to best buy their sold out of the kinnect. Why are people buying it if their is hardly any games for it?

That's because it had the power of Operah and $500 million in ads and pr backing it up. If anything, the kinect emulated what nintendo did with the Wii, and what they'll probably do again with the 3DS.

Overall, you have an exact repeat of the previous generation. A lesser machine with an added gimmick (which then became a gameplay innovation) versus an extremely (relatively) powerful machine.
This generation, you have a lesser machine with an added gimmick (and who knows what sort of magics Nintendo will throw out that would make 3D somehow become integral to gameplay, of course, if they will at all) versus an extremely powerful machine that has adopted handheld norms (a touchscreen). The mass market is going to eat up the glasessless 3D no matter what, and in this day and age, that almost automatically means you win the "console war"

We all know what happened to the PSP last gen... As for the pricing issue, I'm assuming it's going to be $275-350, and if I were to give it a solid price, probably $299.99. I also don't see the battery life being anything longer than 5 hours.

Try harder Sony, and try to get your ads right again. That one was horrendous.

I dunno, with more powerful platform, you have devs concentrate a lot of energy on the graphics, in order to take advantage of all the power + not be outshined by competition. Though I agree, theoretically, with more power, you can have more going on.

As for the 3ds comment. o_O I think everyone saw that the 3DS would be less powerful than the PSP2. But I don't think that Nintendo has ever taken graphics over gameplay... And plus the Sony conference spent a lot of time showing off the graphical capabitily of the NGP and very little on actual gameplay innovation. Sure they had the rear touch screen, but I have a feeling it'll be a nightmare accuracy wise >.>

I think Greg was being sarcastic because everything he said is the reverse of what's true.

Yeah, I was thinking it, but it was hard to say, cause it's theoretically true (minus the last statement)

I think Greg was being sarcastic because everything he said is the reverse of what's true.

No, I was being entirely serious in that Nintendo is putting focus on the graphical capabilities of their system when Sony isn't even trying and they have a system that is arguably twice as powerful as the 3DS.

The PSP2 is, as of right now, a much more appealing handheld. It has dual analog (Nintendo couldn't even get this right), an OLED touch screen (Practically guarantees fair battery life), and have you seen that tech demo? Do you understand the potential that this system has? What potential does the 3DS have, other than "Let's rehash a Gamecube game and incorporate '3D' into the title". The only reason I would even consider a 3DS now is for the eventual Zelda titles.

Arguing about which system is the more superior one is extremely pointless, because it's all dependent upon the user's tastes / interests in regards to a system. Is that person interested in the quantity of games? Is that person interested in quality? I can't really say that any of the DS games are bad, but most of the games don't really appeal to my tastes, since I play mostly RPGs. I'm not into seeing stuff like .. virtual pets, or Barbies. Of course, this is why I am often detracted from the main purpose of owning a DS, which is to play Pokemon games or whatever else and what have you.

I only preferred the PSP because:
-I look at graphics a lot when playing a game
-I enjoy great artwork
-I love games that are obnoxiously long and grindy (YEAH, LOOKIN' AT YOU, TALES OF ETERNIA AND P3P)
-It has games in specific genres I enjoy, which consists of a sh`itton of RPGs

I've recently picked up "Ys: The Oath in Felghana" because a ton of friends online, as well as irl, recommended to me.

>same interests as me
>INTERESTS

It really depends on what you enjoy. Neither systems are bad. It's okay to be a biased though, but I wouldn't say the DS suck. It just doesn't have games that I normally target. But let's say if the new DS system does have a sh`itton of RPGs (which I would never expect to happen), I would gladly purchase it for that sole reason alone. Kinda like how I'm planning on buying the new PSP, because it has games in genres I enjoy. RPGsplease. It's like that one terminology, "aesthetic". What one perceives to be beautiful or tasteful is really subjective, because what one person thinks is beautiful artwork, to another, is trash.

an OLED touch screen (Practically guarantees fair battery life)

Speculated battery life is 4-5 hours. Battery is un-replaceable.

additional pictures

Thanks, Zelkova. My d`ick just hardened because of seeing the awesome resolution.

nope almost all the ds music games are smash the bubble... the only innovation is rhythm heaven and it was originally for gba

There's a lot of games like that drum one(?) that needed all sorts of stuff like sliding, bubbles, buttons, the microphone thingy, or some combination of those, and it needed a lot of coordination.
Also, opinion.


Also, the PSP is a crap ton more powerful than the DS but why does it not have any games.

lulul okay now I'm just trolling.