I'm disappointed about the low resolution as well. Almost every new Smartphone has a higher resolution. However I'm very happy that it will get a gyro sensor. I wonder if the touchscreen is multi-touch capable?
Its not multitouch Anyways, I agree with Butler on the games part: what sony is doing with Move is what MS should do with Kinect, which is ditch the wiicrap (which is getting old) and make it work in innovative ways with ACTUAL games
Just as a reminder, SD has a minimum of 480 vertical lines of resolution... the 3DS is edging at "Low definition" territory. IMO the screens looked pretty good if they were actually processed at that res.
Then that answers why you don't get eyestrain! Seriously try playing something like Monster Hunter for a few hours on a 40" 1080p TV and you will soon understand our pain and why everyone's crying out for the Wii HD (when is TGS again?) Epic facepalm image!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYnyBxVhK_c Only hands on video i've seen that actually shows the 3DS running a demo (guessing there might be a locked date for when press can show actual videos of the games/demos.
In this country the people with the money to buy a 40" tv are very few. The high res TV's i've played in are 32" tops...
It's amazing how this guy alone changed the whole way Sony does it's marketing. Remember those creepy and disgusting commercials?
Well I'm really glad they have considered the storage this time. Does anyone know which has better quality the carts Nintendo use or UMD? Or does it even matter? I guess I'm just wondering if the storage limits what developers can do? Shame about the screens resolution. But you can't have everything I guess!
Well one thing for sure is that using carts against any kind of disc is a relief for the system's battery.
Well, you have to consider that the machine is actually producing 3 separate images - 1 for each eye on the top screen, and 1 for the touchscreen. This adds up to .26 Megapixels, whereas the PSP's screen is only .13 Megapixels. The original Nintendo DS produced only .09 combined Megapixels. You also have to consider that to create the 3D image the entire scene needs to be rendered twice, and therefore it should take twice the time. I read somewhere that the 3D version of Wipeout HD - which runs at 60fps in 2D - runs at 30fps. The point I'm trying to make is that, because the device produces 3D images, sacrifices needed to be made in order to keep the framerate at an acceptable level. Apparently Nintendo decided to sacrifice resolution for 3D. I personally don't think it's that big of a sacrifice, but I guess we'll have to wait for the thing to get released to know for sure.
Yes that is a very good point actually. One of the things that killed the PSP when it first came out. Good job they added more battery life in later models. I hope Nintendo decides to ship pods to stores like they did with the DS I'm really interested in seeing this 3D without the need for the shades in person. I've heard from people at E3 it works pretty well.
Very good point raised there and I respect the fact that choosing 3D comes with its sacrifice at the moment with the tech for this without wearing shades is brand new for gaming. And yes I've heard about Wipeout HD being at 30fps in 3D. I wonder if this will effect other titles?
Man, want to see a train wreck? Watch the konami press event. It's just horrible. The presenters are horrible and some of the new games announced are just god awful. Where? That is not a valid comparison. We don't know the full specs of the hardware but knowing nintendo there is a cheap trick in there. Secondly on the DS there was actually 3 Gfx processors (2-2D, 1-3D) which is how it produced images for both LCDs. When a game did 3d on both it was swapping the 3D core between LCDs every other frame (forcing 30fps). There most likely will be a seperate Gfx Core dedicated to the bottom screen. As well a 800x240 res is not complicated to render. iPhone 4 renders at a high res. Yes it does but it is stupid to compare a system where 3D was not apart of it's core tech to a system that is. Also technically speaking, It does not take a game twice the time to produce a 3D image. If done properly, The sceen should be computed by the CPU once with the GPU applying a final matrix trans for the two view ports. Knowing nintendo, the HW probably has the game processing a single scene to the GPU and it handling the projection matrix for each eye (to make sure the 3D effect is consistent between games). Also it's hard to say right now with out tech docs but it's possible the 3DS is also only needing a game to sync to 60hz to produce 3D at 60fps where stuff like the PS3 needs a game to sync to 120hz to produce a 3D game at 60fps.
What sort of trick do you imagine? Doesn't it just use some form of parallax barrier? Or do you mean some other kind of trick aside from the screen? "Stupid" is maybe a little harsh, no? You make some good points, though.
PSP did 3D on Metal Gear Ac!d 2 with that silly cardboard box thingy. Worked pretty well, although that was the same as the 3DS and chopped the screen in half for each eye.
Engadget, kotaku, gizmodo, etc... they all have on-hands videos with the short demos playing. Considering even the SGX GPU on the current iPod touch has almost twice the polygon power of the original ATI in the GC (which was 12M poly/sec IIRC) theres no doubt that even with a cheap chip the 3DS should be able to make near-GC quality graphics at 60FPS in 3D.
Well I mean we don't fully know the details of the LCD it self and what is it's refresh rate. I feel there is a good chance it's a proscan 60hz screen with every other vertical line alternating between left & right image (ie. LRLRLRLRLR...). I doubt they would go with some crazy 120z interlaced screen layed horizontally so where each h-scan line becomes a vertical line. Don't take my replies personally. To me stupid is the same as dumb or shortsided. When I start calling someone retarded, then we know i'm going overboard. :thumbsup:
