Nintendo Next Gen Handheld

[Cube]

I can only imagine how you would be reacting if Nintendo had produced a system with these issues.

 

Like the 3DS marking its own screen?

[Serebii]

Like the 3DS marking its own screen?

XL doesn't do it, nor do standard models made after the start of 2012. That situation has been resolved.

[Sheikah]

So it's basically faultless - then you admit you yourself have seen faults on your unit with blacks!

 

Oh WUT? You didn't just make that up did you? For I sure as shit didn't say it.

 

Your blinkered defence of everything Sony do is what is at fault here.

 

Let's try a different perspective of the events here.

 

You've argued that OLED was a terrible screen choice (on a console it seems you don't have, let's remember) with a Vita gamer, and told me that they were right to replace it.

 

I produce an article that holds the OLED screen in high regard and states how it bitch slaps the competition, and was dropped for cost purposes. This review was made even taking into account any faults. ie. - net result, OLED was worth it.

 

You then proceed to magnify to great lengths some problems, one of which is pretty trivial, the other I wasn't even aware existed.

[S.C.G]

XL doesn't do it, nor do standard models made after the start of 2012. That situation has been resolved.

 

They may have fixed the issue with the original 3DS bit I've had a small scratch on the top screen of my 3DS XL since day 1 due to a very small piece of 'extra' plastic which was loosely attached to the raised rim of the bottom screen, it's barely noticeable though - hence I didn't bother doing anything about it - but yes, nothing like the screen-marking issue of the original model.

[Mandalore]

720p sounds like complete overkill considering a lot of next gen console games struggle to maintain that resolution at a decent frame rate. I'd rather have a 'lowly' 480p screen on the next Nintendo handheld, at least all games would be able to make full use of it whilst running at a perfect 60fps.

[liger05]

XL doesn't do it, nor do standard models made after the start of 2012. That situation has been resolved.

 

I have the XL and my top screen is scrathed.

 

Let's try a different perspective of the events here.

 

You've argued that OLED was a terrible screen choice (on a console it seems you don't have, let's remember) with a Vita gamer, and told me that they were right to replace it.

 

I produce an article that holds the OLED screen in high regard and states how it bitch slaps the competition, and was dropped for cost purposes. This review was made even taking into account any faults. ie. - net result, OLED was worth it.

 

You then proceed to magnify to great lengths some problems, one of which is pretty trivial, the other I wasn't even aware existed.

 

OLED is great but I would say its a cost which isnt required. Super LCD or Super Amoled would be fine.

[Serebii]

I have the XL and my top screen is scrathed.

What on earth did you do to it? I put protective sheets on my two standard 3DSs when closed due to fear of them scratching but have nothing on my launch day 3DS XL and my screen is fine.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Serebii

[liger05]

What on earth did you do to it? I put protective sheets on my two standard 3DSs when closed due to fear of them scratching but have nothing on my launch day 3DS XL and my screen is fine.

 

erm nothing but close it.

 

Just google 3DS XL scratching and you'll see plenty people who will argue the issue wasnt resolved with the XL.

 

Unless you simply think we are all to blame.

[Sheikah]

720p sounds like complete overkill considering a lot of next gen console games struggle to maintain that resolution at a decent frame rate. I'd rather have a 'lowly' 480p screen on the next Nintendo handheld, at least all games would be able to make full use of it whilst running at a perfect 60fps.

 

I'd much rather have 720p 30fps. 480p is lower than the Vita - yet again this would be Nintendo sticking far behind what the competition did a generation ago.

 

Take some lessons from the Wii U, Nintendo.

[Guy]

XL doesn't do it, nor do standard models made after the start of 2012. That situation has been resolved.

 

My launch XL has the exact same vertical scratches as the original. The design is still flawed. A design is broken when the hinge element (designed to protect the screens) ends up damaging one of them.

 

I take mine out and about though. If yours doesn't leave the house much I can understand if it isn't scratching. The scratches come from the system being compressed when closed.

[liger05]

My launch XL has the exact same vertical scratches as the original. The design is still flawed. A design is broken when the hinge element (designed to protect the screens) ends up damaging one of them.

 

I take mine out and about though. If yours doesn't leave the house much I can understand if it isn't scratching. The scratches come from the system being compressed when closed.

 

Hence why some people use a thin cloth to place in between the screens when closed.

 

You shouldnt have to though!!!

[Guy]

Hence why some people use a thin cloth to place in between the screens when closed.

 

You shouldnt have to though!!!

 

Yeah, that works, but it really isn't a solution. Nintendo have just kept quiet on the whole thing, I got over it after a while though.

[Pestneb]

I'd much rather have 720p 30fps. 480p is lower than the Vita - yet again this would be Nintendo sticking far behind what the competition did a generation ago.

 

Take some lessons from the Wii U, Nintendo.

 

Earlier you conceded that the vita seemed HD, even though it wasn't. This is due to ppi. There is a point where, for a given screen size, higher resolution is superfluous. Looking at 3DS games, polygon models can be improved greatly, as can textures. That would have a FAR greater influence on how good games look than vastly improving the resolution.

[Sheikah]

Earlier you conceded that the vita seemed HD, even though it wasn't. This is due to ppi. There is a point where, for a given screen size, higher resolution is superfluous. Looking at 3DS games, polygon models can be improved greatly, as can textures. That would have a FAR greater influence on how good games look than vastly improving the resolution.

 

True, the Vita does benefit from a decent PPI and that's why I made that mistake. However that's not to say that I think it looks as good as it could. It basically has the resolution that I would associate with maybe a 2-3 year old phone.

 

For the next generation, 720p is hardly anything technically mindblowing in terms of other mobile devices. Nor should it be that expensive, when you look at some £100-130 phones that do that or greater with no problem.

 

For me, the resolution on the 3DS XL is horrible. If they want to go with a fairly large size model (which most of the world seems to be trending at the moment) then even 480p wouldn't cut it. I agree graphics can be improved in other areas - but why limit people in one crucial area? A 720p screen surely can't be that expensive if many devices are doing it for cheap.

[Pestneb]

True, the Vita does benefit from a decent PPI and that's why I made that mistake. However that's not to say that I think it looks as good as it could. It basically has the resolution that I would associate with maybe a 2-3 year old phone.

 

For the next generation, 720p is hardly anything technically mindblowing in terms of other mobile devices. Nor should it be that expensive, when you look at some £100-130 phones that do that or greater with no problem.

 

For me, the resolution on the 3DS XL is horrible. If they want to go with a fairly large size model (which most of the world seems to be trending at the moment) then even 480p wouldn't cut it. I agree graphics can be improved in other areas - but why limit people in one crucial area? A 720p screen surely can't be that expensive if many devices are doing it for cheap.

 

but a 720p screen will be more expensive than a 480p screen. Why reduce the quality in several crucial areas just to improve a superficial one?

 

If the choice was improved textures and polygon counts, for example, or the same textures and polygon counts, but a higher resolution, I hope you would agree the choice is a no brainer. Sure, higher resolution will be nice, but it's what is DONE with that resolution that is important.

Obviously, there is a point where additional improvements in polygon counts and textures will largely be lost unless a corresponding improvement in resolution takes place. I hope that Nintendo allow a resolution that allows for the prettiest possible games to be displayed in their best light, whilst also allowing games that focus more on content to also come across wonderfully.

[Sheikah]

but a 720p screen will be more expensive than a 480p screen. Why reduce the quality in several crucial areas just to improve a superficial one?

 

Resolution is really quite important up to certain levels, then tails off the higher it goes. A 480p 3DS sized screen would still benefit greatly from an upgrade. It's also incredibly behind just about every new releasing handheld device.

 

And like I said, it's not really expensive. Budget tablets are doing that. In fact, drop 3D and do this.

[Zechs Merquise]

I'd much rather have 720p 30fps. 480p is lower than the Vita - yet again this would be Nintendo sticking far behind what the competition did a generation ago.

 

Take some lessons from the Wii U, Nintendo.

 

The opposite would be true for anyone who values playability over just staring at a game.

 

If Nintendo set the bar at 60FPS I think people who actually valued playing their games rather than arguing over resolution would be happy.

 

I'd much rather take a hit on resolution to have smooth performance and playability.

[Serebii]

Resolution is really quite important up to certain levels, then tails off the higher it goes. A 480p 3DS sized screen would still benefit greatly from an upgrade. It's also incredibly behind just about every new releasing handheld device.

 

And like I said, it's not really expensive. Budget tablets are doing that. In fact, drop 3D and do this.

Budget tablets are also not that great at rendering games because they're budget. You get what you pay for.

[Sheikah]

The opposite would be true for anyone who values playability over just staring at a game.

 

If Nintendo set the bar at 60FPS I think people who actually valued playing their games rather than arguing over resolution would be happy.

 

I'd much rather take a hit on resolution to have smooth performance and playability.

 

I would rather have 720p 60fps than 1080p 30fps.

 

But 480p 60fps? No thanks. For me, resolution is something that doesn't bother me too much as long as it isn't too low. When I play on my 3DS XL it is most definitely too low. 480p with the same size screen would feel the same.

 

And they also cut themselves out of other areas. No one would want to use this for anything other than playing Nintendo games. People would use their tablets to play app games, even if they also released on the new Nintendo console.

[Serebii]

I would rather have 720p 60fps than 1080p 30fps.

 

But 480p 60fps? No thanks. For me, resolution is something that doesn't bother me too much as long as it isn't too low. When I play on my 3DS XL it is most definitely too low. 480p with the same size screen would feel the same.

 

And they also cut themselves out of other areas. No one would want to use this for anything other than playing Nintendo games. People would use their tablets to play app games, even if they also released on the new Nintendo console.

PS3 and 360 very very rarely manage 720p60fps locked. Hell, some Xbox One games *coughTitanFallcough* struggle with it. What on earth makes you think a handheld could do it, be affordable (and not sold at ridiculous loss) and have decent battery life?

 

I would be very, very, surprised if the next Nintendo handheld is higher than 480p on the top screen.

[Cube]

Budget tablets are also not that great at rendering games because they're budget. You get what you pay for.

 

My Nexus 7 seems to handle game graphics better than my 3DS, and it's an outdated model.

[Sheikah]

What on earth makes you think a handheld could do it, be affordable (and not sold at ridiculous loss) and have decent battery life?

When did I say that?

 

I was saying to Zechs that I would rather have 60fps and 720p than 1080p and 30 fps, to counter his idea that I don't care about gameplay. But I wasn't talking about handhelds (thought that was obvious when I said 1080p).

[liger05]

And they also cut themselves out of other areas. No one would want to use this for anything other than playing Nintendo games. People would use their tablets to play app games, even if they also released on the new Nintendo console.

 

This is why I think 480p would be too low. Who wants to watch youtube in 480p?

 

Said it before but I don’t think Nintendo can go cheap on the hardware anymore. Tablets and smartphones have brought a new expectation of what people want or expect with handheld devices.

[M_rock]

But 480p sounds bad on an actual HD computer screen, not on a smaller screen like 3DS!

I don't understand how people can expect a handheld console to have such a high res screen?

WiiU, PS4, XBone all have output in 1080p 60fps (or at least I think so), so it's not very reasonable to expect that from a lower cost handheld? (unless you all want to pay 700 euros??)

[Sheikah]

But 480p sounds bad on an actual HD computer screen, not on a smaller screen like 3DS!

 

If people did not want nor care about decent resolutions then phones wouldn't be pushing 1080P on their 4/5 inch screens. When I got my Nexus 4 after an iPhone 3GS, boy was the difference noticeable.

 

In reality, we probably can't expect that for gaming but there should be compromise. 480p on the next generation handheld will not cut it - it'll be like what the Wii was when the others brought out PS3 and 360. Right now 720p is affordable and by no means high tec since lots of other devices are that or better - and in 2 years or so the difference will really be marked.