……forgetit
Member
Yeah, none of that would make any sense.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why it's totally wrong to expect Nintendo's next handheld to have an high res screen.
- Thread starter LeleSocho
- Start date
Yeah, none of that would make any sense.
That's why its better for Nintendo to combine their home console and handheld into 1 unit. They are not about to drop the 3DS design since they have been remixing that thing for years now. No way will they drop that design.
Nintendo will give the Wii-U another shot and try to market it correctly, unlike the Wii-U nonsense. People had no clue what was going on and the console suffered for it.
levyjl1988
Banned
I'm one to not put my 3DS in my pocket, but would put in my backpack. I would sacrifice the slimness for a more ergonomic unit to hold and one that pumps a lot of battery life.
Currently at the moment my 3DS is using the handgrip and it works ergonomically when playing Smash Bros 3DS, it's like holding a 360 controller, the handles are really comfortable.
Also my iPhone 5 is using the mophie (haven't upgraded it). I go for function after fashion.
Then again that's my situation. Others may be in different camps.
I'm finding the 3DS resolution feeling quickly outdated though. I love the 3D, though I think it would benefit with a 1080p screen at best just to keep up to the higher standard and expectations of consumers.
Currently at the moment my 3DS is using the handgrip and it works ergonomically when playing Smash Bros 3DS, it's like holding a 360 controller, the handles are really comfortable.
Also my iPhone 5 is using the mophie (haven't upgraded it). I go for function after fashion.
Then again that's my situation. Others may be in different camps.
I'm finding the 3DS resolution feeling quickly outdated though. I love the 3D, though I think it would benefit with a 1080p screen at best just to keep up to the higher standard and expectations of consumers.
It all depends on whether they'll keep auto stereoscopic 3D, two screens and what size they're going for. Lots of people seem to forget that 3DS has two screens and that one of them is glassless 3D and I doubt that's cheap to produce.
Personally, I really really like having two screens, in games like Zelda it helps A LOT and the option to have 3D is great, but I don't know if sales wise it's worth it to keep betting on this form instead of going for one "big" screen with a better ppi.
Personally, I really really like having two screens, in games like Zelda it helps A LOT and the option to have 3D is great, but I don't know if sales wise it's worth it to keep betting on this form instead of going for one "big" screen with a better ppi.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
Their parents will buy them 1080p smartphones then.
radios shipping overview
Member
Nintendo is the cheap dad who drives a minivan from the 90s and won't take the family out to eat.
Bony Manifesto
Member
What if Nintendo launched with two versions of their next handheld? Instead of waiting almost four years to release a 'New 3DS' style upgrade to replace the existing model, why don't they do it at launch, and offer them both at two different price points?
……forgetit
Member
Um, no they won't. I still remember going to GameStop and a mom came in with an 8 year old on his birthday. She asked him if he wanted a 3ds and he said no, he wanted another iPod touch. As in he already had one, he had a blue 5th generation one and wanted a black one too for some reason.
You're probably referring to combinations between the current 400x240 and 720p that would require less pixel pushing but are likely to result in a higher res screen that still has useful properties if 3D was omitted. This is true but that's where it gets much more opinionistic. I would expect them to stick with 3D because it is a useful differentiator and n3DS is a game changer in that respect even for people who where critical of the original design. Seems unlikely they would abandon that. I've also noted that there is a pretty solid cap on PPI and so in terms of a roadmap if you were to think 2 generations out you've already hit it but 3D will continue to have visual gains.
StarStabbedMoon
Member
Ok, but what about a system with a 480p screen capable of outputting and rendering a 720p video signal? And this would only happen, say, when it's both plugged in and connected to the TV streaming device. That I think could be more reasonable, if the rumors of a hybrid system are to be believed, and Iwata's denials are ignored. I could see Nintendo biting the bullet on good graphics capability if it allowed them flexibility for their "home console."
Alot of us are thinking it either has to be capped at 480p or 720p... but what if it's BOTH!
Alot of us are thinking it either has to be capped at 480p or 720p... but what if it's BOTH!
……forgetit
Member
That's actually more than most here are expecting.
You don't want idle hardware, that's really inefficient and expensive. Any shared games will be scaled up for a console, console games will not be scaled down without deliberate porting which is entirely not the point.
GhostTrick
Banned
Yes ! You're right ! And yet it doesn't change my point:
It's still running at less than 720p. Mobile tech has limitations, even in a tablet form factor.
I'm not saying 720p is impossible. But it's not as easy as people make it sounds like, as it's a non-brainer or anything lower would be a shame.
Using this logic no launch games are ever natively developed, they're all always ports. Prototyping on PS3 and having your engineering group always simultaneously targeting Vita spec isn't the same thing as porting a PS3 game. Uncharted GA isn't a PS3 port. Clearly.
Hardware engineers target a certain performance level, heat levels, cost range, etc. Nintendo designed the 3DS spec to be fully capable of 240p autostereoscopic output, and as a result all games are managing that. I'd say it's likely the Wii U chipset was engineered targeting 720p spec, given all Nintendo's own games hit that threshold and it scales perfectly down to the 480p Gamepad screen.
These things are balanced and considered though, of course hardware is made to target certain performance. Particularly when it has it's own built in screen resolution. Any hardware that has issues hitting that target (especially when the hardware vendor has problems maintaining it) probably should've been better balanced in the design phase.
Even more so than resolution, a 4 inch screen is unacceptable today, let alone in 2016.
outunderthestars
Banned
True, but half the people on this thread don't care about resolution, and also, Nintendo isn't aiming it's device to "hardcore gamers", their main market is kids, teens and older fans that grew up with Nintendo. Also, see how the GC and the WiiU turned out sales wise, whereas the 3DS and Wii, which, yes, have terrible resolutions, sold like hot cakes, because they spent little on components and sold them for a cheap price, raising sales.
eighty(one)
Member
The iPhone 3GS was the current iPhone when 3DS was unveiled. The screen of Apple's device wasn't a much better resolution, compared to 3DS.
"The display on the iPhone 3GS also is 3.5 inches but is only 320x480 at 163 ppi with a 200:1 contrast ratio, noticeably lower resolution than the 960x640 at 326 ppi display on the iPhone 4."
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/iphone/iphone-faq/differences-between-iphone-4-iphone-3gs.html
At this point, 3DS had finalized hardware and was being shown off at E3 in 2010, prior to launching early 2011.
Shortly after, Apple changed the smartphone/mobile device game, with a new "retina'' screen resolution, unveiling and launching the iPhone 4.
When you look at 3DS and its lower resolution screen, through the window of what was available (in 2010/2011), the 3DS wasn't as hideous - the problem is that gaming hardware is typically around for 4-8 years and the world of tech evolves past concrete features, of said hardware.
I don't think the next Nintendo handheld, will be as behind in screen tech, as others suggest. It won't be top of the line, but it won't be 420p.
I'm not so sure.
Using my insular GAF and real life experiences, I'd say the 3DS user base is probably more core gamer than kids - probably 16+, in age demographics. It seems the vast majority of localizations and games are tailored to an older demographic, on both 3DS and Vita.
Nintendo probably sees this, especially NOA. Using CN as my personal metric (requires your age for logins and surveys), they probably have an idea what demographic is buying games and LE hardware variants.
I'd wager that's why NOA only is releasing the XL - they don't think adults want a smaller handheld, with cute faceplates.
"The display on the iPhone 3GS also is 3.5 inches but is only 320x480 at 163 ppi with a 200:1 contrast ratio, noticeably lower resolution than the 960x640 at 326 ppi display on the iPhone 4."
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/iphone/iphone-faq/differences-between-iphone-4-iphone-3gs.html
At this point, 3DS had finalized hardware and was being shown off at E3 in 2010, prior to launching early 2011.
Shortly after, Apple changed the smartphone/mobile device game, with a new "retina'' screen resolution, unveiling and launching the iPhone 4.
When you look at 3DS and its lower resolution screen, through the window of what was available (in 2010/2011), the 3DS wasn't as hideous - the problem is that gaming hardware is typically around for 4-8 years and the world of tech evolves past concrete features, of said hardware.
I don't think the next Nintendo handheld, will be as behind in screen tech, as others suggest. It won't be top of the line, but it won't be 420p.
I'm not so sure.
Using my insular GAF and real life experiences, I'd say the 3DS user base is probably more core gamer than kids - probably 16+, in age demographics. It seems the vast majority of localizations and games are tailored to an older demographic, on both 3DS and Vita.
Nintendo probably sees this, especially NOA. Using CN as my personal metric (requires your age for logins and surveys), they probably have an idea what demographic is buying games and LE hardware variants.
I'd wager that's why NOA only is releasing the XL - they don't think adults want a smaller handheld, with cute faceplates.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Any reason why a new nintendo handheld couldn't have one of those intel cherrytrail atoms that come out in a few months?
(other than nintendo likes to put 6-7 year old hardware in their handhelds and sell it at a quadruple premium, that is not a valid reason)
6" 720p screen with one of these and a decent 6-7000mah battery (batteries are dirt dirt dirt cheap before you say anything) wouldn't have to cost much, baytrail is available in tablets for around 100 euros, cherrytrail is the successor
(other than nintendo likes to put 6-7 year old hardware in their handhelds and sell it at a quadruple premium, that is not a valid reason)
6" 720p screen with one of these and a decent 6-7000mah battery (batteries are dirt dirt dirt cheap before you say anything) wouldn't have to cost much, baytrail is available in tablets for around 100 euros, cherrytrail is the successor
Ingueferroque
Banned
To add context, the PSP had a resolution of 480 x 272.
yet the vita doesnt even sell half of what 3ds sells, with its "amazing" screen. ill take a 3ds anyday over a vita.
Intel is subsidizing their hardware for tablet manufacturers. I doubt they'd do the same for a video game Manufacturer.
They'd also be breaking backwards compatibility.
Also, You remember that time when they were going to put that Tegra chip inside the 3ds, but nvidia wasn't ready? Because the chip was 6-7 years old of course. Good times.
(I don't even have a joke written up about how the 3ds was sold for a loss for a long time)
IAmHaunter
Banned
Then why are they so expensive?
PSVITA is almost the same price as the New 3DS...I don't get why people constantly say that when the price margins aren't even that big...
……forgetit
Member
The vita doesn't sell BC it doesn't have the franchised or games the vast majority want, the 3DS is slowing down in sales BC it's reaching it's market saturation and it's visuals are looking dated. Really if the two combined it would probably be doing great right now.
staticneuron
Member
sörine;151156217 said:
Most aren't, that is why launch titles are nowhere as impressive as games launched later on. I already addressed this. Uncharted GA isn't a port on a technical level because they never released it on a PS3 but at the same token they never had a firm target or hardware to hammer down so even in their post mortem they talk about the compromises they made and how they would have been able to do better given more time and resources.
It doesn't change the fact that they really did make this on an engine that was running on a PS3 and down graded for assumed specs.
sörine;151156217 said:
Nothing of what you said here refutes what you quoted.
Hardware engineers are not game devs. Hardware engineers for Nintendo follow in a trend left by Gunpei Yokoi so they never push the edge on leading tech and the devs conform to the hardware after it is designed.
EDIT: Just to refresh your memory, this was in the post you dismissed earlier
And again to reiterate, we are both speaking facts but you are using semantics to obscure the fact that they admittedly didn't work on Vita final hardware or solid specs for most of the development of a title and you used a launch game to refute the ability of games on Vita being native res. All of this is a silly argument to begin with because of the reasons I mentioned before and also the sheer fact that most games on the Vita actually hit native res. The few you can list most likely were designed without the resolution target (or even the vita itself) in mind.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
And yet the 3DS doesn't sell half of the iPhone, Galaxy _, Nexus, etc, etc. The better hardware is the better hardware and miracle of miracles you can have the good games AND modern era hardware at the same time. One doesn't preclude the other. Its not a Sophie's Choice situation as much as other people would like to present it out of some strange need to pre-defend future revelations.
It'll probably be cheaper to source qHD+ screens than it would the kind of things they're using now. I think at some point buying in resistive has got to incur a cost as well - they'be been a part of a dwindling user base for that.
I think this will be the equivalent of the handheld spaces n64 to GameCube jump for Nintendo. I'm not talking power, I'm talking tech / architecture investment. They'll invest in something decent to try and rejuvenate their market but they may then stick with derivatives of that for many years (just as they did from GC to Wii to Wii U). I have the same hopes for the Wii U successor actually. A more forward thinking plan designed to give them options for the next ten or fifteen years rather than the next four or five.
I think this will be the equivalent of the handheld spaces n64 to GameCube jump for Nintendo. I'm not talking power, I'm talking tech / architecture investment. They'll invest in something decent to try and rejuvenate their market but they may then stick with derivatives of that for many years (just as they did from GC to Wii to Wii U). I have the same hopes for the Wii U successor actually. A more forward thinking plan designed to give them options for the next ten or fifteen years rather than the next four or five.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Well said.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Nice when the poster already admitted this was one thing that would have to change
.While we are on topic, this is another issue of perceived great abuse because a memory card has very user perceived value. People are fine paying a lot more to go from 16 GB to 32/64 GB on iPhone (... and it is not the fastest flash memory implementation around either), but cannot look past this on PS Vita although the price of the card is not in and of itself that huge of a barrier. Still it is a perceived one and that is fair.
I tell you what though, if games are allowed to execute from external memory, I would design the console to regularly take some performance metrics from the card (especially when it is first installed in the system) and refuse a card that does not have the minimum required read and write speed.
I do not think any developer would want to deal with performance issues due to an el cheapo SD card found in a McDonalds meal
.I for one am throwing my hat in the 480-540p camp. Don't get me wrong, I'll be pleasantly surprised if there's more pixels, but I sincerely doubt it. Even if the stuff of legends happens and they use a decently modern SoC by accident, they'll probably rather opt for more filtrate per pixel instead of more pixels per square centimetre. And, honestly, I have no problem with that. The reason why I don't own a 3DS is the region locking, not the hardware. I've been playing on Nintendo consoles since the days of the NES, and not once were they truly bleeding edge, fanboyism and nostalgia aside.
Then again, if they manage to troll everyone AGAIN by dragging some obscure GPU out of some forgotten corner of the patent office I'll probably start digging a grave for them. The DS with its Scanline rendering and the zany hybrid fixed function GPU of the 3DS, or the exotic GameCube/Wii GPU... they do love their nonstandard solutions, don't they. And boy, did it burn them each and every friggen time.
Then again, if they manage to troll everyone AGAIN by dragging some obscure GPU out of some forgotten corner of the patent office I'll probably start digging a grave for them. The DS with its Scanline rendering and the zany hybrid fixed function GPU of the 3DS, or the exotic GameCube/Wii GPU... they do love their nonstandard solutions, don't they. And boy, did it burn them each and every friggen time.
metalslimer
Member
If it's still two screens 540p or bust.
Graphics Horse
Member
It is known that Nintendo are ordering CUSTOM SHAPED SCREENS for a new system ( either a QOL product or a game system) So why do people still act like they scour Chinese wholesalers to buy discounted screens to design their system around? They've had a long relationship with Sharp who will build enough units to order whatever bespoke screen resolutions, sizes and pixel arrangement they require.
My dream for the next Nintendo handheld is to be a combination of a 3DS and a Vita. Ditch the second screen and have a single 540p 5" capacitive touchscreen with Gorilla Glass. Include a stylus similar to Note 4. As for controls make it similar to New 3DS but make the 2nd slide pad as big as the normal slide pad, and include a L2 button.
When I meant a combination of 3DS and Vita I didn't only mean hardware. I want Nintendo's hardware to be an easy port machine. I'd like all those cool Indie games the Vita gets along with a proper account system for digital games.
When I meant a combination of 3DS and Vita I didn't only mean hardware. I want Nintendo's hardware to be an easy port machine. I'd like all those cool Indie games the Vita gets along with a proper account system for digital games.
……forgetit
Member
I really think it's time for Nintendo to throw everything out and start from scratch. Investing in a similar architecture for there next handheld and console and officially leaving the DS and GameCube legacy behind. It should allow for more play between handheld and console and a streamlined development process that could get third parties onboard again.
Duxxy3
Member
Yeesh. Is an iPhone 3g screen too much to ask for?
Fourth Storm
Member
I remain hopeful that Nintendo have assessed their current situation and are making the necessary adjustments for the next gen. Takeda's comments about not designing solely for the Japanese market reaffirm my hopes. They must see that the 3DS is an utter disappointment coming off of the DS, GBA, and original Gameboy line. And it's not due to a poor software lineup either. The Wii U is an ever more obvious message from consumers: "What you're doing, Nintendo, is not working!"
While the first PSV with its OLED screen had good image quality, the myra-effect (in dark screens it shows spots looking like stains) or whatever it is actually called and higher risk of burn-ins was really insulting quality-wise. But it seems to be ok as long it is nice and flashy (for a certain amount of time), I really can´t imagine what ridiculous backlash most other companies would have gotten for the same problems.
In general when it comes to resolutions especially on small screens I see it reaching the point of beeing good enough, similar to how VHS looked quite bad in comparison to DVD movies, while DVDs look quite decent compared to 1080p, sure the difference is visible but most people I know are still quite happy with the former. I think it´s quite likely that the next gen handhelds will reach this "minimum".
3DSs resolution quite obviously was planned with the original screen size in mind and as far as I´m concerned it looked quite decent on the small screens at the time, while it got a little inappropriate for the screens sized like the 3DSXL, but to be honest while not optimal I ended going forward with the bigger screens, so it really didn´t bother me that much all things considered.
Having used the Gamepad I really can´t say that I would be too bothered when their next handhelds matches its resolution as long as the 1st party support is in place. I would be more in favour of continuing the dual screen design, than simply going crazy with screen resolution.
In general when it comes to resolutions especially on small screens I see it reaching the point of beeing good enough, similar to how VHS looked quite bad in comparison to DVD movies, while DVDs look quite decent compared to 1080p, sure the difference is visible but most people I know are still quite happy with the former. I think it´s quite likely that the next gen handhelds will reach this "minimum".
3DSs resolution quite obviously was planned with the original screen size in mind and as far as I´m concerned it looked quite decent on the small screens at the time, while it got a little inappropriate for the screens sized like the 3DSXL, but to be honest while not optimal I ended going forward with the bigger screens, so it really didn´t bother me that much all things considered.
Having used the Gamepad I really can´t say that I would be too bothered when their next handhelds matches its resolution as long as the 1st party support is in place. I would be more in favour of continuing the dual screen design, than simply going crazy with screen resolution.
……forgetit
Member
A lot of people here seem to think so lol, the few thinking sub-480 are nuts. I think 540 is the most likely, but that's still lower than and iPhone 4, but higher than a iPhone 3gs
Notor!ousG
Member
Wouldn't it make sense when they develop a sort of NintendoOS, that their console will be 1080p en their handheld 720p?
The screen literally has to go pitch-black for these to be visible, such as during loading screens. This is such a non-issue really.
There was no "port" though, PS3 was only used for prototyping design before dev hardware was available and the engineering team always maintained the code base simultaneously. It wasn't a downported PS3 engine, it was literally a Vita engine running on a PS3.
Bend do seem very capable though and if they weren't locked into launch or they were allowed to iterate further (Uncharted GA2, inFamous Vita, etc) I'm sure they could've further optimized and gotten their engine to native res.
That's not entirely true, Yokoi's "withered technology" angle went out the window in the mid 1990s with N64. Besides the Wii (which was a special case and more "recycled" than "withered") Nintendo's home consoles haven't followed that philosophy and even their handhelds buck it in certain respects (DS WiFi, 3DS autostereoscopic screen).
Also at Nintendo the hardware and software engineering teams work in tandem to arrive at spec. You're completely wrong here, in fact the 3DS hardware producer came from the software side (Hideki Konno, head of EAD Group 1). Yokoi himself even routinely headed both hardware and software projects. Maybe this degree of collaboration and integration is why Nintendo puts out hardware that software engineers don't seem to have issues with maintaining native res?
SystemUser
Member
Nintendo gets their screens from Sharp just like of the Gameboy and DS line always has. Nintendo orders "custom" screen, but they get a really good price on them. If Joe BlowEbay can sell the 3DS upper screen for $7 then how much do think Nintendo pays for them buying in bulk?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/111538994757?lpid=82&chn=ps
Huawei can sell the Ascend Y530 for $160 unlocked and not on contract. Huwei and the retailer make a profit at that price. Huawei does not stand to collect licensing fees for games sold in the Google Play app store. Compare the specs of the Ascend Y530 to the N3DS.
http://www.gsmarena.com/huawei_ascend_y530-6103.php
http://www.gsmarena.com/huawei_ascend_y530-6103.php
Anyone that thinks that the 3DS cost Nintendo more than $100 to manufacture in 2012 has never even causally looked into buying parts in bulk or contracting manufacturing in China. I am still confused about how Nintendo thought they could release a handheld that launched with a higher MSRP than the Wii. Has anyone ever released a portable that launched for more than the preceding home console? Maybe the Turbo Express?
shadowsdarknes
Member
That is some funky logic.
Just because consumers didn't go for System X that had feature A, does not mean that consumers don't care about feature A.
Its only one component.
Nintendo doesn't get nearly enough credit for their 3D tech. New 3DS is really awesome. Even if it goes in a different direction than phones it's still cutting edge tech, no other product exists that works the way it does. A lot of this thread seems to be forcing square pegs in round holes. All the speculation of off-the-shelf phone parts makes sense only if that's the direction they actually move in but so far with their last several pieces of hardware there's very little to directly compare to.
Joke or not, Nintendo engineers seem capable of properly balancing their hardware at least.
Remember folks the lower the screen resolution the more Nintendo can focus at the games scope instead of trying to push pixels.
Lets say for example we wanted a game with the scope and graphics calibre of Mario Kart 8. The Wii U version was 720p. If the screen of the next handheld was 720p, they would need to have hardware as powerful as a Wii U with mobile heat and battery usage in mind. This would be quite a challenge. However if the next Nintendo handheld had a 480P screen it would be easier to get close to that. Now let's look at Vita a lot of games are sub native which make the games look ugly. If Sony went for a 480p screen, perhaps they could have managed to have WipEout run at 60FPS, Uncharted could have been native resolution, other games could have been more detailed and have more scope. Personally I think 480p on a 5" screen is fine. That PPI is good enough for gaming. We don't need retina screens for handheld gaming systems. Retina is good for Web browsing and pictures.
Lets say for example we wanted a game with the scope and graphics calibre of Mario Kart 8. The Wii U version was 720p. If the screen of the next handheld was 720p, they would need to have hardware as powerful as a Wii U with mobile heat and battery usage in mind. This would be quite a challenge. However if the next Nintendo handheld had a 480P screen it would be easier to get close to that. Now let's look at Vita a lot of games are sub native which make the games look ugly. If Sony went for a 480p screen, perhaps they could have managed to have WipEout run at 60FPS, Uncharted could have been native resolution, other games could have been more detailed and have more scope. Personally I think 480p on a 5" screen is fine. That PPI is good enough for gaming. We don't need retina screens for handheld gaming systems. Retina is good for Web browsing and pictures.
I honestly don't care about high res screens. I honestly don't understand the obsession for 'better' screens in a handheld device. I have an Iphone 4s and the screen gives me headaches. I don't know what they put in these new devices, but the screen radiation just makes my head hurt.
We need to go back to PSP screens, just large enough without the massive eye strain.
I haven't tried the Vita yet, so I don't know if that's any better.
We need to go back to PSP screens, just large enough without the massive eye strain.
I haven't tried the Vita yet, so I don't know if that's any better.