Nintendo DS Released

Covar · Post by **Covar** » Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:54 pm

i played a DS with the hunters demo at a target last thursday. while i'll ready planning to get one eventually due to the game list and strong reviews from people hear, i now am planning on buying one the day after christmas(if i don't get it earlier).

as soon as i turned it on i was floored. that is the most impressive handheld i have ever seen.

InvisixIsLeet · Post by **InvisixIsLeet** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:36 pm

Nyarlathotep wrote:As a long standing veteran of numerous "PS has bettah grafics than teh N64" arguments, sharper pixelly textures tend to impress people more than softened blurry ones...

Actually, I agree that PSX did/does have better graphics than N64. It handled more polygons per second. Also, in my opinion, pixleation looked better than N64's burried textures.

Besides that who gives a crap? I mean really, the Nintendo DS has EXTREMELY sharp and vivid graphics, and looks MUCH better than N64 or PSX ever did, can do more polygons per second, more 3D functions, and doesn't do the "3D wobble" that plagued PSX games.

The Nintendo DS is one of the first technological "breakthrough" products that actually wowed me in along time, and is a product that actually is a technological breakthrough.

F8 · Post by F8 » Thu Dec 02, 2004 2:52 pm

This thread is still going on? I'm sure more than a few people who bought the DS are gonna wish they'd saved their money when the PSP hits store shelves. Although, personally I couldn't care much, 'cuz I wouldn't be caught dead playing any portable system anywhere other than my own house...and if that's the case, I might as well just play my consoles. Nothing says 'get laid' more than playing a handheld system at school or waiting for a bus.

DaMadFiddler wrote:No, it won't look like the PSP. But it looks a damn sight better than anything on PlayStation, and some games--even at launch--surpass the '64.

All these arguments about the DS looking better than the original Playstation or N64....who cares? It's 2004, why are we comparing old consoles to a brand new system? It damn well SHOULD look better than those systems, since it's a brand new release. And if it doesn't look better, well then that's just pathetic. It is 2004, like I said, and companies should be keeping with the technology. It seems kinda sad to be impressed that the DS would look better than an N64 or Playstation...those are pretty low standards.

Post by **|darc|** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:09 pm

F8 wrote:All these arguments about the DS looking better than the original Playstation or N64....who cares? It's 2004, why are we comparing old consoles to a brand new system? It damn well SHOULD look better than those systems, since it's a brand new release. And if it doesn't look better, well then that's just pathetic. It is 2004, like I said, and companies should be keeping with the technology. It seems kinda sad to be impressed that the DS would look better than an N64 or Playstation...those are pretty low standards.

Yeah, I was pretty pissed when the GBA came out months after the PS2 and couldn't match it in terms of graphics. I mean, come on Nintendo, you had a whole 8 months to top Sony's PS2 and you come out with the GBA which can only do SuperNES games? There is no excuse for that! It should've had somewhere between PS2 and Xbox quality graphics...

DaMadFiddler · Post by **DaMadFiddler** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:10 pm

Invisix wrote:
Nyarlathotep wrote:As a long standing veteran of numerous "PS has bettah grafics than teh N64" arguments, sharper pixelly textures tend to impress people more than softened blurry ones...
Actually, I agree that PSX did/does have better graphics than N64. It handled more polygons per second. Also, in my opinion, pixleation looked better than N64's burried textures.

Besides that who gives a crap? I mean really, the Nintendo DS has EXTREMELY sharp and vivid graphics, and looks MUCH better than N64 ever did, and also can do more polygons per second, and more 3D functions.

Well, the added storage of a full CD helped. However, I didn't really care for either system, personally (I know! Blasphemy!). I felt the N64 was rather poorly designed, both in terms of hardware, and aesthetically...I HATE that controller! I also couldn't stand the PlayStation's "texture wobble" in handling 3D objects. Unfiltered textures are one thing. Having them shift and distort spasmadically is another.

There were also very few games on each system that I cared about. All in all, I felt that the 32/64 bit era of gaming was really rather desolate...that's when I caught up on all the SNES/Genesis goodness I'd missed out on a few years before. Lessee what I actually did like from those consoles:

N64- MarioKart 64, Mario 64, Zelda 64, Smash Bros. Goldeneye was okay too, but Timesplitters is better

. N64 had far too many platformers and not enough anything else, and a fella gets tired of seeing everything using the same damn graphics engine

PlayStation- Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Medievil, Metal Gear Solid. I'm not a big fan of RPGs, and most other PlayStation fare was either pretty bland, or a watered-down PC port.

To be honest, the Saturn had far more interesting games than either of these two platforms...but it was too expensive, and they killed it off too early, so most of its stuff end up in botched ports to PlayStation anyway.

saber07 · Post by **saber07** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:08 pm

|darc| wrote:
F8 wrote:All these arguments about the DS looking better than the original Playstation or N64....who cares? It's 2004, why are we comparing old consoles to a brand new system? It damn well SHOULD look better than those systems, since it's a brand new release. And if it doesn't look better, well then that's just pathetic. It is 2004, like I said, and companies should be keeping with the technology. It seems kinda sad to be impressed that the DS would look better than an N64 or Playstation...those are pretty low standards.
Yeah, I was pretty pissed when the GBA came out months after the PS2 and couldn't match it in terms of graphics. I mean, come on Nintendo, you had a whole 8 months to top Sony's PS2 and you come out with the GBA which can only do SuperNES games? There is no excuse for that! It should've had somewhere between PS2 and Xbox quality graphics...

owned

BlackAura · Post by **BlackAura** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:25 pm

It's 2004, why are we comparing old consoles to a brand new system?

Spoken like someone who has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

Handheld systems are completely different to full blown consoles, which are completely different to PCs, which are different to servers, which are different to supercomputers...

The technology to do something like the DS, at the kind of price the DS is being sold at, with reasonable battery life, low heat dissipation, and high reliability simply did not exist even a year ago. You could have made it for three times the cost, or with low battery life and high heat output, but what would be the point? That's also why the original GBA did not have a backlight (too expensive, drains too much battery), but the GBA SP did (the cost and power consumption of the backlights had decreased, and the cost of custom batteries had come down too). The DS has two processors (an ARM7 as used in the GBA, and a faster ARM9), two screens, far more powerful video hardware, wireless networking, and a load of other stuff, yet it doesn't cost much more than the GBA did when it came out, it uses the exact same batteries as the GBA SP, and still gets around 8-10 hours off a single charge.

A handheld is not the same thing as a console. Never has been, never will be.

F8 · Post by F8 » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:24 pm

saber07 wrote:
|darc| wrote:
F8 wrote:All these arguments about the DS looking better than the original Playstation or N64....who cares? It's 2004, why are we comparing old consoles to a brand new system? It damn well SHOULD look better than those systems, since it's a brand new release. And if it doesn't look better, well then that's just pathetic. It is 2004, like I said, and companies should be keeping with the technology. It seems kinda sad to be impressed that the DS would look better than an N64 or Playstation...those are pretty low standards.
Yeah, I was pretty pissed when the GBA came out months after the PS2 and couldn't match it in terms of graphics. I mean, come on Nintendo, you had a whole 8 months to top Sony's PS2 and you come out with the GBA which can only do SuperNES games? There is no excuse for that! It should've had somewhere between PS2 and Xbox quality graphics...

owned

Funny thing is, I thought he was serious. And I agreed.

Anyway, here's some food for thought. If Sony can come up with a handheld like the PSP which is roughly the power of PS2, how come Nintendo can't come up with a handheld that's roughly the graphical quality and power of the GameCube? Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

How come this hasn't been brought up?

BlackAura wrote:A handheld is not the same thing as a console. Never has been, never will be.

Not true, the PSP is very similar in graphics to the PS2.

BlackAura · Post by **BlackAura** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:56 pm

Not true, the PSP is very similar in graphics to the PS2.

First - No, it doesn't. All screenshots I've seen of PSP games have similar texture resolution to a PS2 (and PS2 games suffer badly from bland, low-resolution, and repetitive textures), far fewer polygons, absolutely no special effects, and far more limited use of blending. It looks like an N64 would have done if it had more RAM. Yes, that's still somewhat impressive for a handheld, but it comes at quite a high cost (battery life, manufacturing cost), and is still nowhere near what a PS2 can do.

Second - If it were true, it wouldn't be all that hard. The PS2 is a piece of junk, and PS2 games tend to look, at best, mediocre. First generation Gamecube and Xbox games looked far better than anything the PS2 has ever come up with.

No, just in case you didn't realize it... THE PSP IS NOTHING AT ALL LIKE A PS2. Despite the lies and misleading information that Sony's marketing department have been putting out, the PSP is not even remotely as powerful as a PS2. That's because it's a (semi-)portable system, not a full blown console.

Post by **|darc|** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 4:08 am

F8 wrote:Anyway, here's some food for thought. If Sony can come up with a handheld like the PSP which is roughly the power of PS2, how come Nintendo can't come up with a handheld that's roughly the graphical quality and power of the GameCube? Put that in your pipe and smoke it. How come this hasn't been brought up?

Why isn't its power between that of an Xbox and PS3? PS2 came out years ago...

DaMadFiddler · Post by **DaMadFiddler** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 4:41 am

[continues to sit here contentedly playing Mario 64 and Mr. Driller DS]

Nyarlathotep · Post by **Nyarlathotep** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:23 pm

Invisix wrote: Actually, I agree that PSX did/does have better graphics than N64. It handled more polygons per second. Also, in my opinion, pixleation looked better than N64's burried textures.

Actually, it doesn't - the N64 handles more polygons per second, which is kind of my entire point, that more variety in textures in PS games made people think it was doing more than it actually was, and that a more limited texture 'pallette' on the N64 made people think it was doing less than it was...

Back on topic, I got mine today (it was pretty funny to see a crate of DSs and games show up in the office) and it is HUGE o_O

I suspect it wont be too long before we see a DSP or something that drops the GBA slot in favour of an overall sleeker design - of course, there'll have to be a few more DS games 'out there' before thats a viable proposition, but if sales are good for the DS this xmas I fully expect to see whole rafts of developers jumping on the bandwagon.

Some of the graphics I've seen so far are also really nice - something like the luigis casino minigame in Super Mario 64x4 looks incredibly crisp, and I can't wait for the inevitable Pok?mon Stadium DS, because it would fit the Ds down to a tee.

I also liked the DS 'take' on the morphable Mario head at the start of Mario 64...

I didn't get much of a chance to play the MP:H demo, or M64x4 mainly because I was too busy playing Your favourite game in Paint with 15 other people in Pictochat - which moves insanely fast when you have 16 people all using the draw function simultaneously rather than 'typing' messages

Matt · Post by **Matt** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:32 pm

If Sony can come up with a handheld like the PSP which is roughly the power of PS2, how come Nintendo can't come up with a handheld that's roughly the graphical quality and power of the GameCube?

How about, Nintendo prefer innovation to specs

bizzle · Post by **bizzle** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:45 pm

I actually played a DS today, though only for a few minutes. Someone I know ended up getting one and they let me check it out. The two screens thing still doesn't appeal to me, but meh. The graphics looked a lot better than a thought, and I didn't seem to see any jaggies, which I was expecting, though the only game I saw was Mario.

InvisixIsLeet · Post by **InvisixIsLeet** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:16 pm

Nyar, actually, PSX (Playstation) does do more polygons per second.

Every spec sheet I have seen has stated 360,000 polygons per second for Playstation.

Ok here is a "side-by-side" comparison of Playstation and Nintendo 64.

Polygon Power
Nintendo 64: Around 150,000 polygons per second
Playstation: Around 360,000 polygons per second (lacks comparable effects)

CPU Speed
Nintendo 64: 93.75Mhz
Playstation: 33.86Mhz

Memory
Nintendo 64: 4MB (+parity) Rambus D-RAM (Expandable to 8MB with proprietary memory module)
Playstation: 2mb (Plus 1MB Video RAM, 512KB Sound RAM)

Memory Bus Bandwidth
Nintendo 64: 500MB/s (Megabytes per second)
Playstation: 200MB/s (Megabytes per second)

Playstation DOES allow for more polygons per second. Playstation hardware however seriously lacks in comparison to a Nintendo 64. Nintendo 64's texture filter engine was utter crap though, also Nintendo 64 produced rather horrid framerates.

Zealous zerotype · Post by **Zealous zerotype** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:09 pm

Wow great wya to make this a topic from the 90's n64 vs playstation...
Any ways I Might get a ds later on.I do really like what I have seen from it though.However I think the psp will out do the ds due to marketing since alll the sony fan boys will run out and buy it.

Covar · Post by **Covar** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:10 pm

nintendo also gets there polygons per second with real game worlds(i.e. textured colored marios running around and jumping everywhere) while sony and microsoft uses unlighted untextured triangles. thats why the ps2 got an estimated 55million p/s and xbox got about 66million p/s, while the gamecube got about 33million p/s

my numbers might be off but the idea is accurate.

Nyarlathotep · Post by **Nyarlathotep** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:47 pm

Invisix wrote:Nyar, actually, PSX (Playstation) does do more polygons per second.

Every spec sheet I have seen has stated 360,000 polygons per second for Playstation.

Ignore 'spec sheets' because Sony infamously use theoretical maximums versus Nintendos use of real numbers, as 1LINUXuser stated - the best programmed PSX games rarely got to about ~100,000 polys per second; as I said, some people thought the PSX had 'better' graphics because the PSX could use things like FMVs, prerendered backgrounds and multiple textures between levels to make the PSX look like it was doing more work than it actually was.

If you want better proof look at something like N64 RE2 or Ridge Racer, and directly compare the same game on PSX on the original hardware - or indeed just compare similar games on emulators at high resolutions than they were intended to be played at; PSX games almost universally look horrible and N64 games polish up surprisingly nicely in all but their blurry textures, because most of the models were a decent polycount to begin with.

The N64 was the more powerful console, thats pretty much an inarguable fact anywhere except heavily Sony-biased sites and publications.

The thing about working with low poly models, is that a good texture will hide a low poly model (and generally look better) than a badly tectured higher poly model does, despite the higher poly model requiring more cpu to render.

To use a modrn example, in many ways Half Life 2 looks a lot nicer than Doom 3 does, mainly because Valve used extremely good texture work, and ID (for reasons I don't even know) used very poor low resolution textures - the Doom 3 engine is so much more powerful than Source is that most modern computers cannot even begin to render correctly with it.

Back on topic:
I finally had a proper go with Metroid Prime, and the disapointing use of the touch screen outside of the minigames in Mario 64x4 is more than made up for by the really quite stunning Metroid Prime Hunters default 'mouse and keyboard' control scheme - making Metroid Prime: Hunters far more of an actual FPS than its bigger brother on the GameCube ever was. I'm not a big Metroid Prime fan, so I wasn't holding out much hope, but eh, if GC MP played like this rather than how it does I would probably have liked it more.

It's easily the closest thing to mouselook I have ever seen on a console, and I have high hopes that a company will utilise it for a full on 16 player wifi FPS; hell, a port of HL with some included mp mods like TFC or DMC could make the DS the 'must have thing' straight off the bat

Lartrak · Post by **Lartrak** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:33 pm

It's easily the closest thing to mouselook I have ever seen on a console, and I have high hopes that a company will utilise it for a full on 16 player wifi FPS; hell, a port of HL with some included mp mods like TFC or DMC could make the DS the 'must have thing' straight off the bat

Did you hear that Xlink along with one other group successfully tunnelled both Pictochat and Metroid?

Veggita2099 · Post by **Veggita2099** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:44 pm

I finnally got to try out the DS today. Of course the only game they had was that crap Metroid demo. I thought Prime had some crap controls, but that one was even worse! As far as the system goes I like it. Wish it had something besides that stupid Metroid Demo and Pico Chat with it though.