Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwistedBishop" data-source="post: 3710669" data-attributes="member: 12503">That seems more like a problem that the PSP used to have, rather than one it does currently.  The multiplatform port glut still goes on, just like the DS, but the shovelware of older PS1/2 titles to the system has largely been corrected with a heathly original release schedule, and even stuff that did see publication previously are getting very nice makeovers for the system.  The best example of this is Castlevania: Dracula X Chronicles.  It's a remake of a Castlevania game (called Rondo of Blood), except they've completely remade the game with beautiful new 3D art, AND thrown in the original version AND thrown in the direct sequel Symphony of the Night.  Even a lot of older games that don't get as lavish treatment are still very fine adaptions to the system (such as the Final Fantasy remakes or Megaman Powered Up, both with all new graphics and bonus content).Not exactly.  The DS consumes more power with the lid closed, since all it can do is power off the LCD screens.  The PSP can enter fully into a sleep mode due to the memory stick.It's interesting that diversity is used as a negative to the system's library.  Sure, it doesn't have as many short-burst gaming experiences as the DS does, but as you say it does have them, along with providing more meaty games in the process.  That should be a good thing honestly.  It also seems odd to say you can't play a longer game in short bursts, anymore than you can't read a novel unless you devote hours to it.  The way I see it, if I'm on a lunchbreak and playing New Super Mario Bros. or Syphon Filter or reading a few pages of a book, I'm having fun no matter what.The problem with the Gamecube comparison is what that system did for Nintendo.  How was failure judged?  Not financially, since it did make Nintendo plenty of money.  But it failed to regain lost marketshare suffered from the N64 days, infact losing as large a percentage relative to the N64 as that system did to the SNES.  Nintendo was in serious danger of being forced out of the console market.The PSP didn't come out and destroy Nintendo's handhelds (the way I'm sure Sony execs would have liked) and some things outright failed (like the UMD movie push) but it does have a very strong install base (25 million or so? Around what the Xbox and Gamecube sold during their entire lifecycle).  It's achieved that even with all its technical oddities and a vastly higher price tag for most of its life cycle.  It has also, much like the Wii has done in the console sector, carved out a niche for itself away from what Nintendo has been doing.  By most accounts this should be seen as a success story, especially when you look at how other handhelds have fared in the past.  In a lot of ways it can be seen as the Anti-Gamecube infact, giving Sony a strong foot in the door of handheld gaming versus the Gamecube nearly sending Nintendo packing from the console sector.But yet this concept of being "too little, too late" seems to imply that the PSP must beat the DS in some way in order to be worth owning or playing.  My question is, why? I tend to compare the PSP to the DS only since the latter is universally judged an enjoyable platform to own, rather than to engage in the futility of fanboy platform wars.  When someone else claimed the PSP doesn't have even 5 games worth owning -- subjective, certainly, but blatantly false by reviews alone -- that moves it out of a typical "PSP vs. DS" topic and into the one we're currently having about the quality of experience.  It's in that regard that I don't understand how marketshare enters into the discussion.</blockquote>

Verification