Do people not want an upgrade?

I made a thread about a month ago noting how aged the DS is compared to things like the iTouch in terms of graphics.People flocked to the aid of the 5 year old console. Nobody seemed to be able to accept the fact that maybe it is time for a new graphically superior console. When I mentioned the possibility of an upgrade, everyone said that graphics don't make the game. That is true; but how long are people willing to go on with highly pixelated textures claiming there is no need for an upgrade as long as the gameplay is good? If that is the case, then why one Earth was Halo 3 made for the Xbox 360? Why was an Xbox 360 made in the first place? The system didn't modify gameplay besides the addition of a couple new buttons, so why didn't we just keep playing games on the first Xbox? My answer: nicer visuals, better and larger environments, and the potential to have more things happening at the same time adds more fun into the game.

But the Xbox is just an example.

What I'm curious is how long will it take before people will want to move up to nicer graphics? I love my DS but I would like my games to look nicer, have more things on screen, and have a larger scope in general. Relatively speaking, the DS is outdated... and that seems okay for most who are using the excuse that gameplay is what matters. Has anyone considered that gameplay is hindered by a lack of hardware?

P.S. think through what I wrote before giving a fanboy answer.

The DSi just isn't being supported which is almost entirely Nintendo's fault since they've been treating the DSi as just another NDS iteration rather than a new platform. It may have updated hardware but no one is taking advantage of it and judging from things right now I'd say it's going to remain unsupported for a very long time.

So why should anyone upgrade to the DSi? For the crappy cameras? For the nicer screens? For the possibility that somewhere down the road someone might actually make a game that takes advantage of the upgraded hardware?

The DSi just isn't being supported which is almost entirely Nintendo's fault since they've been treating the DSi as just another NDS iteration rather than a new platform. It may have updated hardware but no one is taking advantage of it and judging from things right now I'd say it's going to remain unsupported for a very long time.

So why should anyone upgrade to the DSi? For the crappy cameras? For the nicer screens? For the possibility that somewhere down the road someone might actually make a game that takes advantage of the upgraded hardware?

gameguy6700

I've heard a few devs announce that they're making stuff... There's already some DSi Ware titles from 3rd party devs.

Anyway, It's not that I don't want an upgrade, it's just not necessary. I'll takean upgradewhenever Ninty decides to release one as long as they give me a good amount of time with my DSi. I'm more than satisfied with that.

First off, Gameplay > Graphics. In genres like Shooters however, I believe that the gameplay side is peaking. The only way to out-do others is visually, like awesome graphics, special effects etc. I'm no gaming developer, but I believe gameplay wise, Halo 3 and all of the new aspects it brings could have been playable on the original Xbox, but would be lacking compared to current gen shooters. I believe same the holds true with most current shooters, aswell as fighters and racers, just to name a few genres.

The Xbox 360 was made to compete with the PS3. Again, I believe the only point to the new-gen was to enhance gaming visually. Not just graphics wise, but physics, special effects etc (Physics can change gameplay in some cases). I wouldn't have worried too much if the new generation of gaming consoles hadn't been released & continued releasing games for the older models, aslong as the gameplay didn't suffer.

Personally, I use the hand-helds mainly for RPG's, strategy games and puzzle games, and I believe artistic visuals and 2D sprites are the way to go. Older Pokemon, Final Fantasy & Zelda games that were released on the GBA are fine visually by my standards. The GBA was upgraded to the DS to implement touch screen, the upgraded visuals were a bonus. Unless the next generation of Nintendo Handheld implements a new feature as game changing as the touch screen, I see no point to upgrade. As for the DSi, it offers very little to warrant the extra cost ($100 AU) for someone that owns a camera and media player.

How about creating games that look better on the DSi by using it's hardware to it's full potential, while being playable but with less detail on the old DS?

That way everyone will be happy, the old DS users will get a game that will be good DS quality wise and the DSi owners will be able to enjoy better detailed visuals and effects.

No one loses, all are happy and more people will be motivated to buy the new DSi, which is good, no?

Let me tell you something: 80% of Nintendo fans could careless about graphics.

Also, just don't worry about other people's opinions, or what games they play. Play games for fun, and that's it.

Wow, when did i enter the system wars forum? O_O

Well, i guess. I think Nintendo is milking the DSi as far as it can go to extend the DS life as best as they can. Surely other systems has more power, but DS games are still fun and awesome and can beat a lot of those so called "superior" graphically games.

Anyway, i think what Nintendo really needs is to develop more their ideas. Lately they have great ideas with great potential, but they just leave it behind with poorly executions of it. On the GBA we had the GBA video which could be big but it wasn`t very much developed. On the DSi, they have the chance to implement a VC, but they did? No. DSi also has more power but they don`t seems to be interested in looking for ways to use it.

In other words, Nintendo has some great ideas and stuff but they aren`t making efforts to push it further.

I'd rather wait a few more years. The longer we wait, the better the new system will be, and it'll seem that much better than what we already have now. Not to mention, we aren't short of any good games as it is, so let's milk this cow to its bones first, and then move on.

Every year I get a new game system, but I didn't get the Wii or PS3 this year, they kinda looked boring XD (lol, I know, How could I say they're boring XD)

[sarcasm] Every 1 nos is all bout teh graffix [/sarcasm]

Every year I get a new game system, but I didn't get the Wii or PS3 this year, they kinda looked boring XD (lol, I know, How could I say they're boring XD)

Kiki250

You mean every generation?

Upgrades are nice, but I wouldn't pay extra money just for a camera, wider screens and dsiware. That stuff just doesn't interest me.

In my opinion, the best games ever made were before the PS2, and those systems surely had hardware restrictions. It really isn't about the graphics, although better visuals is always a very welcome bonus. I follow the platform with the most quality games, if Nintendo has a far superior handheld with less great games, I wouldn't care in the slightest. It's all about fun, and although graphics are great, and better hardware is awesome, developers generally forget about the fun factor and spend too much time making their games look pretty to meet the standards of these new systems. If you take some true game designers, toss them in a room and tell them to create some brand new SNES games, we could potentially see some of the best games to ever hit the planet. So in the end, I don't consider new hardware an upgrade unless there's truly a great library of great games to go with it.

In my opinion, the best games ever made were before the PS2, and those systems surely had hardware restrictions. It really isn't about the graphics, although better visuals is always a very welcome bonus. I follow the platform with the most quality games, if Nintendo has a far superior handheld with less great games, I wouldn't care in the slightest. It's all about fun, and although graphics are great, and better hardware is awesome, developers generally forget about the fun factor and spend too much time making their games look pretty to meet the standards of these new systems. If you take some true game designers, toss them in a room and tell them to create some brand new SNES games, we could potentially see some of the best games to ever hit the planet. So in the end, I don't consider new hardware an upgrade unless there's truly a great library of great games to go with it.

Matt-Porter

Yes, but new new hardware lets games do much more. Why do people keep going back to the graphics? I do believe good graphics makes games more fun, but new hardware also lets the games have larger environments, smarter enemies, easier to navigate areas (because of more detail), more things happening at once, better physics and so on. New hardware can only support gameplay because developers have fewer restrictions. And fewer restrictions let people do what they originally had in mind.

[QUOTE="Matt-Porter"]

In my opinion, the best games ever made were before the PS2, and those systems surely had hardware restrictions. It really isn't about the graphics, although better visuals is always a very welcome bonus. I follow the platform with the most quality games, if Nintendo has a far superior handheld with less great games, I wouldn't care in the slightest. It's all about fun, and although graphics are great, and better hardware is awesome, developers generally forget about the fun factor and spend too much time making their games look pretty to meet the standards of these new systems. If you take some true game designers, toss them in a room and tell them to create some brand new SNES games, we could potentially see some of the best games to ever hit the planet. So in the end, I don't consider new hardware an upgrade unless there's truly a great library of great games to go with it.

shakensparco

Yes, but new new hardware lets games do much more. Why do people keep going back to the graphics? I do believe good graphics makes games more fun, but new hardware also lets the games have larger environments, smarter enemies, easier to navigate areas (because of more detail), more things happening at once, better physics and so on. New hardware can only support gameplay because developers have fewer restrictions. And fewer restrictions let people do what they originally had in mind.

It's safe to say the people who use portable systems don't care as much for graphics because the games are practically guaranteed not to look as nice as Wii games, for example, and that hasn't stopped them from buying and playing the DS.

I actually really like the GBA, even though that is REALLY outdated. I was really bummed when it was officially removed from Gamespot as one of the main systems. I think that people who play on portable systems worry less about graphics and more about the game itself, or else they wouldn't buy a portable one in the first place.

The DSi just isn't being supported which is almost entirely Nintendo's fault since they've been treating the DSi as just another NDS iteration rather than a new platform. It may have updated hardware but no one is taking advantage of it and judging from things right now I'd say it's going to remain unsupported for a very long time.

So why should anyone upgrade to the DSi? For the crappy cameras? For the nicer screens? For the possibility that somewhere down the road someone might actually make a game that takes advantage of the upgraded hardware?

gameguy6700

did the TC mention the DSi? i think he meant the DS platform in general

but it all depends, if DSi keeps spanking the DS Lite in sales worldwide year round, DSi will be near 10-12 million units sold by Xmas, so i'd really expect DSi exclusive games at stores in Spring 2010 or Summer 2010

How about creating games that look better on the DSi by using it's hardware to it's full potential, while being playable but with less detail on the old DS?

That way everyone will be happy, the old DS users will get a game that will be good DS quality wise and the DSi owners will be able to enjoy better detailed visuals and effects.

No one loses, all are happy and more people will be motivated to buy the new DSi, which is good, no?

Chubah

this. the thing i want to see if the DSi can do (and since no one can confirm the DSi has the same VRAM as the Lite so we don't know yet) is can it do more than 4 players online?

Coz 4 players is pathetic, and too easy for people to quit and ruin the match. but 8 players is better to an extent

I mean DSi has 4 times the RAM, double the CPU clock speed, so if the VRAM is at least 1.2MB instead of 656kb or something higher, i'd hope we could get 8 player Mario Kart racers, 8 player Star fox dogfights instead of 4 or 2

I like upgrades but I don't want too many. There have been 3 modified DS. They should at least name it Nintendo DS 2HyperNate

Since when Does Nintendo us numbers in console names?

They won't. It'd be likely if its called Super Nintendo Dual Screen, DS-Advanced, DS-evolved, or something like that.

I made a thread about a month ago noting how aged the DS is compared to things like the iTouch in terms of graphics.People flocked to the aid of the 5 year old console. Nobody seemed to be able to accept the fact that maybe it is time for a new graphically superior console. When I mentioned the possibility of an upgrade, everyone said that graphics don't make the game. That is true; but how long are people willing to go on with highly pixelated textures claiming there is no need for an upgrade as long as the gameplay is good? If that is the case, then why one Earth was Halo 3 made for the Xbox 360? Why was an Xbox 360 made in the first place? The system didn't modify gameplay besides the addition of a couple new buttons, so why didn't we just keep playing games on the first Xbox? My answer: nicer visuals, better and larger environments, and the potential to have more things happening at the same time adds more fun into the game.

But the Xbox is just an example.

What I'm curious is how long will it take before people will want to move up to nicer graphics? I love my DS but I would like my games to look nicer, have more things on screen, and have a larger scope in general. Relatively speaking, the DS is outdated... and that seems okay for most who are using the excuse that gameplay is what matters. Has anyone considered that gameplay is hindered by a lack of hardware?

P.S. think through what I wrote before giving a fanboy answer.

shakensparco

yeah i was playing need for speed pro street this morning and was like wow this game would have been amazing if the graphics were better. I get REALLY distracted by poor graphics! 99% of the people who dont want an upgrade just bought their DSi and think that is 'the' upgrade because of slightly more ram or something.