SiN Posted January 30, 2011 So, the banner titles for the PSP like God of War and Monster Hunter aren't portable, but... Nintendos banner titles Super Mario and Zelda aren't portable either! Most "banner" titles are more "epic" and less portable and that even includes many iPhone games! Chinatown Wars is conceivably the most epic handheld game ever, AND is the most portable friendly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miffy495 Posted January 30, 2011 Also, while Mario 64 (a launch title from 2004, and also a port of a console game) isn't portable, NSMB totally is. Fantastically so. And while the earlier Zeldas may not be that great at being portable, note that the person who said that also said that they haven't played the DS ones. I actually thought that Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks did it quite well. Not the best, as you'd still need to finish a dungeon in one go, but as I said back in my first or second post on this thread, the puzzles on a room-to-room basis were actually compartmentalized very well, in a way that I really wish God of War (for example) had been. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patters Posted January 31, 2011 Portable gaming to me is the ability to play for an incredibly short time, say 5 minutes or less; then also having the ability to spend hours playing said game (hi Pokemon). This is coupled with not wanting to play it on another system. Think of it like a book, I can read a little on a 10 minute bus journey, or a lot on a 4 hour train journey. The DS, like the Gameboy before it, didn't have a little brother mentality behind it's games, it played to it's strengths. Sure there were mistakes getting there, see Mario Land (Theme song Miffy) however this was fixed with it's sequel. Hell, why do you think Pokemon is so incredibly popular? It took the core of a turn based RPG and condensed it to a form which makes sense for a game on the go (1v1 battles, 4 moves per Pokemon, less random battles, etc). The PSP however is very much the little brother of the PS2 and PS3, all the games have the feeling that they want to be as good as the "big boy games". Every time I've played one I get the feeling that this game would be so much better on my TV or monitor, in a similar way to my Wii, I'd rather play it on my 360 or PC, because it looks like crap in 480p opposed to in 720p or 1080p respectively. Starcraft 2 doesn't work on a controller, Halo doesn't work on a handhold. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
syntheticgerbil Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) I think you explained it very concisely Patters. To think about games that are meaty but suitable for portable play, it actually seems very much like a delicate balance. It seems you guys are also complaining about the Metal Gear games for the PSP (which I haven't gotten to yet), and it seems funny to me that they sort of went backwards on what was established for the first handheld game way back for Gameboy Color, especially when I think a lot of them share the same director (not Hideo Kojima, who would probably have no idea how to make a portable game ever). It's not "portable" if you half to remember too many things? Doesn't Pheonix Wright require you to remember EVERYTHING to solve the case? While Layton doesn't require you to remember anything, if you do, you can probably figure out the mystery before the game tells you...If you just want brainless fun, then there are plenty of arcade/retro collections for the PSP that you probably beat on your lunch break or commute... I think you're mixing up brainless as the final opposite for things that require a longer term of memorization and having to exert focus for long periods of time. Having shorter bursts of gameplay that you don't feel lost when you come back to after a while away doesn't equate the game to Asteroids or Pong. Fantastically so. And while the earlier Zeldas may not be that great at being portable, note that the person who said that also said that they haven't played the DS ones. I actually thought that Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks did it quite well. Not the best, as you'd still need to finish a dungeon in one go, but as I said back in my first or second post on this thread, the puzzles on a room-to-room basis were actually compartmentalized very well, in a way that I really wish God of War (for example) had been. Thanks for mentioning these two, I was sort of curious if Nintendo had improved the ability in which you could put down a Zelda game and pick it back up again with the latest DS ones. Minish Cap, the last Zelda handheld I finished, seemed to section off areas in the game much better than Link's Awakening or the two Oracle games, but still had many elements that required a lot of memorization of the overworld map and possible missed sections that I found frustrating simply since it was the first time for me playing a handheld Zelda in short bursts on breaks at work. The earlier ones I had just done at home when I was still in grade school. I think Minish Cap is a mighty fine game as it is, but I sort of felt like I was tarnishing it playing it in the method I was. Edited January 31, 2011 by syntheticgerbil Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainFish Posted January 31, 2011 What if you want to play games on the platform that play to the control strengths without caring about portability? I haven't played that much handheld stuff, but I did play Metroid Fusion and it was compartmentalized and directed to the point of being kinda rote. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 I'd hate to say it, but it looks like in the next generation BOTH consoles will be very "non-portable" by your standards... Frankly, I think portable gaming might be the future, or at least it's trying to be? I you just released a new PS3 with a more powerful GPU, the average user won't notice much of a difference and will think it's not worth their money, so... why not try to make a new PSP that's almost as powerful as a PS3? You guys gotta accept that one of these days, your CELLPHONE will be able to run CRYSIS, so why not port or make a Crysis sequel for it? Of course, they'll still make "portable" games for it, although frankly I don't think the "portable" name is adequate because there are many games that fit this description that are on PC or consoles... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SiN Posted January 31, 2011 It has nothing to do with graphics or technology, this is purely a design issue. I don't think you fully understand our argument, but I'm not sure how to explain it better than Patters and Miffy already did. You guys gotta accept that one of these days, your CELLPHONE will be able to run CRYSIS, so why not port or make a Crysis sequel for it? That's like saying, "your console is powerful enough to run Starcraft 2, why not port it?" There are plenty of design issues that have nothing to do with technology. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 OK, so it's down to design, if the touchscreen is good enough, shouldn't you be able to play Starcraft on it? If the people who work on the are smart enough won't they be able to work around these design issues? But RTS games are whole different thing, although if the portable system had a BIG touchscreen to see all the details and a good virtual keyboard (or a real one) I don't see why it would be possible... I assume that what you're saying is that the developers won't be able to work around the console's design flaws, but isn't that their job? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lu Posted January 31, 2011 If the screen was good enough and the people who worked on handheld Starcraft were indeed smart, then I'm pretty certain that the game you'd end up with wouldn't really be like PC Starcraft at all. Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is arguing against having games like Uncharted on NGP. They're talking against how a bunch of flagship PSP titles are basically PS2 games with a bit more frequent checkpointing. Fear being that the situation is going to be PS2 is to PSP what PS3 is to NGP. Sticking with Uncharted as an example; making it into something that can easily be played for 5 minute stretches of time would change the nature of the game somewhat, I would think. So then yes, Tanu, you are right that a lot of these are game design issues that can be figured out and hopefully they will. The track record for that hasn't been great for PSP. Good games. Just not as portable as some would like. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonCole Posted January 31, 2011 I'm gonna go ahead and skirt around this weird argument by simply saying that I wish more games would just have a "save state" feature. More DS games seem to have that feature than PSP games, which I figure contributes quite a bit to the nebulous "portability" banner that we're throwing around here. Anyways, I've been burning through last week's podcasts and I've heard a lot of people talk about Dead Space for iOS. It's sort of cool hearing about a successful attempt at bringing a console-like experience to Apple's suite of devices without sacrificing the depth that comes from complex gameplay. While I don't think everyone wants to play games like Dead Space on the go, I find it funny that most everyone's comments sound kinda like "it looks really great for an iOS game, the controls and UI are great for a touchscreen, and the sound/voice acting is on par with Dead Space". Now, I don't want to offhandedly shit all over how you guys play games, but I really think that the ability to jump in and jump out of handheld game isn't as wildly popular as conventional logic might suggest. There's something appealing about a small device being able to generate as beautiful and deep an experience as a current generation console... and I honestly think that this simple flourish of technology is enough to attract quite a few people to the NGP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patters Posted January 31, 2011 Of course, they'll still make "portable" games for it, although frankly I don't think the "portable" name is adequate because there are many games that fit this description that are on PC or consoles... Yes, but they aren't on a device I can fit in my pocket. The definition of portable is pretty clear, so it didn't feel necessary to clearly state it. OK, so it's down to design, if the touchscreen is good enough, shouldn't you be able to play Starcraft on it? If the people who work on the are smart enough won't they be able to work around these design issues?But RTS games are whole different thing, although if the portable system had a BIG touchscreen to see all the details and a good virtual keyboard (or a real one) I don't see why it would be possible... I assume that what you're saying is that the developers won't be able to work around the console's design flaws, but isn't that their job? Unless the screen is pretty big no, that would defeat the purposes of the game being portable. The game is too complicated to play on a console, so it would be nigh on impossible to play it on a handheld. A smart phone can run the original, easily, does that mean I want to play it on my phone? No of course not. A touch screen is not suited to an RTS, nor is a controller. On a controller one could have a high APM (actions per minute) however it isn't nearly as efficient as a keyboard 16 buttons opposed to the 43 I use in Starcraft. The problem isn't of the game, nor is it of the capabilities of the system, it's purely based on the input device. Developers have and will continue to work around these problems: RTS Halo Wars, Ruse. fairly valiant attempts to justify RTS can work on a controller FPS Halo TBS Civ Rev, Advance Wars Game design is incredibly fickle when it comes to the input device, Civilization, for example is most definitely a board game, however it would be incredibly impractical to play on a table, with discovery, secrecy and of course the sheer size of a randomised board. Sure certain games can work on multiple platforms but this is very much not the case of all games. I would classify the screen on which you play as an input device, it has a direct correlation to your experience, the screen on my phone or DSi is not a place I want to play an intense action game, I don't want to play Starcraft on a massive TV 5 metres away from me. Sure the handhelds can push the pixels, but really is playing on a handheld ever going to be as immersive as a TV or a monitor? No of course not, until they figure a way of using VR of some sort, which is unlikely because it would affect how people travel, if I'm on a bus or the tube, I want to know exactly where I am, which I can do by simply looking away from the screen. Now, I don't want to offhandedly shit all over how you guys play games, but I really think that the ability to jump in and jump out of handheld game isn't as wildly popular as conventional logic might suggest. There's something appealing about a small device being able to generate as beautiful and deep an experience as a current generation console... and I honestly think that this simple flourish of technology is enough to attract quite a few people to the NGP. If you look at why the DS is so incredibly successful it isn't due to longhaul games, but ones of a shorter nature: Brain Training, Nintendogs, NSMB, etc. If you have used public transport a lot in the past 5 years you will have seen thousands of different people playing DS games in this exact manner. This isn't to say that there isn't a market, there is, simply put people didn't buy the PSP for games, however instead used it for media consumption. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 Hmm, I think the argument is mostly going in circles now... most of us are saying that many of the "banner" titles are not "portable" and we all seem to agree that both systems probably have very portable games, it's just that the PSP banner games aren't that portable... And some of the DS games aren't that portable either... The main point of argument here seems to be that we seem to have different views on what makes a game portable, to some of us, it's enough if you can fit it in your pocket and put in sleep mode if you haven't saved yet, while others say it should be in smaller chunks and more "play on the go", as in you can just turn in on and play and you do have to think to hard on what you've done before and what you have to do next... Although we do seem to agree that some games are more portable than others? I'd say we could all agree that portable RTS games are ludicrous, but Robo-pocalypse was pretty good? Do you consider notebooks portable? I wouldn't mind a super Pandora that was netbook sized... You couldn't play on the subway, but if you can play it while in the bathroom, that's pretty portable to me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonCole Posted January 31, 2011 That's kinda self-fulfilling prophecy territory, though, considering the fact that the DS's catalog of games was strong from the very beginning (at least by comparison to the PSP, where I was stuck with the fun but niche Metal Gear Acid for months and months). The reason that a lot of people play the DS is because a lot of people played the DS at its inception, while the PSP didn't gain enough traction for critical mass. People simply didn't think of the PSP as the prominent portable device, so it thus wasn't. Regardless, the DS shouldn't really be the ruler by which we measure sales success. If a handheld has to proliferate multiple demographics with incredibly consistent sales to be considered a winner, I don't really think the 3DS nor the NGP will fit that at all. All I'm trying to say is that the NGP might have the initial offerings and impressive hardware to capture a solid audience that'll keep it afloat, unlike last generation's PSP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 DAMN! I just realized something... If the 3DS and the NGP are both going to be expensive... where will the niche games come out? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 Yeah... I remember the Game Park 32... the only system of "that" type that come out commercially... It only had 4 commercial games... (I might still have it?) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jayel Posted January 31, 2011 Yeah I think the latest incarnation of GamePark consoles do touchscreen, accelerometer, vibration, full 3d acceleration, 6 hours of playtime, etc for measly $150. But Dingoo is almost half the price and I hear it's easier to develop for (wish I had some firsthand experience with it) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 Yeah I think the latest incarnation of GamePark consoles do touchscreen, accelerometer, vibration, full 3d acceleration, 6 hours of playtime, etc for measly $150. But Dingoo is almost half the price and I hear it's easier to develop for (wish I had some firsthand experience with it) But aren't they all used just for playing emulated games? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jayel Posted January 31, 2011 But aren't they all used just for playing emulated games? I suppose that's what most people buy them for, but I think the open hardware community is hoping that gp2x will (eventually) reach the critical mass for indie developers to port their games over and flourish. At least that's the only reason I could think of for putting in touchscreen or accelerometer. I imagine they're quite useless for emulated games, though I could be wrong. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SiN Posted January 31, 2011 I was actually thinking about Halo a couple of days ago ... like Patters said, it worked because it was (re-)designed for the platform. Now I want to know: where the hell is my PSP-designed FPS? And I mean a properly designed one, not a "mapping mouse-look to the face buttons" FPS. "Back in the day", Doom worked fantastically by mapping move/turn to the dpad and strafe to the shoulder buttons. Vertical aiming was automatic. Combine that with Halo-esque skirmishes and checkpointing. That is, contained battles which play a bit differently every time and checkpoints right before & after every battle. Now throw in levels that are mostly (but not completely) linear, and tonnes of enemies, Doom style, and you've got yourself one hell of a game. And yet, nothing... Now, I don't want to offhandedly shit all over how you guys play games, but I really think that the ability to jump in and jump out of handheld game isn't as wildly popular as conventional logic might suggest. I'm sure Dead Space iOS is a great game and sold incredibly well. But you know what sold better? Doodle Jump, Angry Birds, Brain Age, etc... There's definitely a market for "bigger" portable games. But I think that's just the usual vocal minority of hardcore gamers speaking out. The majority of people want portable games to be portable. The games that play to the strengths of the platform are wildly popular. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonCole Posted January 31, 2011 I'm sure Dead Space iOS is a great game and sold incredibly well. But you know what sold better? Doodle Jump, Angry Birds, Brain Age, etc...There's definitely a market for "bigger" portable games. But I think that's just the usual vocal minority of hardcore gamers speaking out. The majority of people want portable games to be portable. The games that play to the strengths of the platform are wildly popular. I don't really want to get into this, but the popularity of certain iOS games is yet again even more dependent on zeitgeist than games in the more traditional format. Considering the fact that the most important metrics for deciding what games to buy are the top free/paid apps lists and Apple's editor's lists, the most popular games only get more popular while more niche games fall by the wayside. So... it's not really fair to compare the success of Angry Birds or Doodle Jump to games on the DS or PSP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted January 31, 2011 Like JonCole said, AngryBirds is popular because it's 99c and it's been free several times... not to mention that many iOS games are constantly resubmitted with different prices just so they can appear on the frontpage when you browse the latest apps... Many scummy things are happening at the App Store... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kolzig Posted February 1, 2011 Angry Birds has been free on Android platform all the time. Did Sony say anything about if PSP2 will be region locked? Of course it's a totally different kind of situation than 3DS as there seems to be no physical cards/discs that you can buy on various regions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nappi Posted February 1, 2011 Of course it's a totally different kind of situation than 3DS as there seems to be no physical cards/discs that you can buy on various regions. Again, the games will be distributed on physical media as well. http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2011/01/27/introducing-ngp/ We have learnt a great deal from our previous experiences and as such will be distributing games both at retail and via the PlayStation Network. We want to give consumers the choice as to how they access the great content available on NGP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted February 1, 2011 Angry Birds has been free on Android platform all the time.Did Sony say anything about if PSP2 will be region locked? Of course it's a totally different kind of situation than 3DS as there seems to be no physical cards/discs that you can buy on various regions. Isn't the Android markerplace like the "Wild West"? People simply don't do anything legally there? I heard you could put broken games, illegal games, whatever you want? It better NOT be region locked, I have a big chunk of import PSP games, and I'd hate to not be able to import any PSP2 games! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
