Sony and the PSP. Okay, and the DS too, fine.

Captain K

It seems that every thread in G&T about the PSP, about a PSP game, or about any kind of PSP news eventually (if not immediately) devolves into "lolz PSP sucks, buy a DS".

This isn't particularly healthy, or good, and many times it's a result of people trolling, or just being dicks.


So, in this thread, let's talk realistically about the PSP. Sure, the DS is a great, innovative system. Its game library is robust, and it costs less than the PSP. Its battery life puts that of the PSP to shame. Like many of you, I personally own a DS, and don't own a PSP.

But is the PSP really a complete piece of shit? Does it make you special or cool if you mock people for owning one, or blast on Sony for the platform's flaws? Or are you just pointlessly re-treading the same ground that tens of thousands of other geeks have tread before you, ruining others' fun in the process?


I don't personally own a PSP, but that's not because I don't want one. I just don't have one--yet. There's more than enough exclusive games for the platform to interest me in it--Metal Gear Ac!d 1 and 2, Metal Gear Portable Ops (and its upcoming sequel), Mega Man Maverick Hunter X, Mega Man Powered Up, SOCOM, Darkstalkers Chronicle, Ultimate Ghosts 'n Goblins, and a few more I can't think of at the moment.

And let's not forget, this is the PlayStation Portable we're talking about! Handheld version of dozens of games you might have missed the first time they were released. It makes the system an easy target for ridicule, but is it really such a negative? There's plenty of people out there who haven't played a lot of the ports available for PSP.



Anyway, let's talk intelligently about the PSP in this thread. Does the DS' vastly superior market share really make the PSP a failure? Are people who decide the PSP is a good investment for themselves really idiots? Does Sony's parade of idiotic PSP marketing campaigns really made the PSP any less of a viable platform?

FierceDeity666

Final Fantasy Tactics will validate the PSP's existence in my eyes.

that is all.

Threepio

lol Sony.

I win!

Personally I sold my PSP - it was a dust gatherer at the time. Now that we're starting to see an influx of more interesting titles I might pick one up again. The idea of the PSP interacting with the PS3 (outside of purchased PS1 games) intrigues me just as much as the idea of th DS/Wii unholy union.

Really, the killer for me was the abbreviated battery life. I'd like to see that addressed at some point.

APZonerunner

Nice PS1 emulation. For me.. that's about it, sadly. Homebrew rocks in other areas, too.

DeaconKnowledge

Had the DS Never existed, the PSP would not be looked at as a failure. Unfortunately for Sony, the DS changed what the definition of 'success' is for a handheld.

jclast

There are good games for it. Every time somebody says it has a shitty library I think of Daxter, MGS: Portable Ops, Racthet & Clank: Size Matters, Lumines, and Loco Roco and wonder why, even if they don't own a PSP, they hate games that are (or look like it for non-owners) fun.

Also, it's a veritable sea of portable RPGs. Valkyrie Profile and FFT on the go? Yes, please!

darleysam

i'm in the "own a DS, would like a PSP someday" camp. Honestly, it does seem like it has a lot of ports on it. This is all well and good if you don't own the originals, doubly so if you want to get some of that action and you're on the go a lot. Me, i don't so-much like the idea of playing the same/similar game again, but in a smaller capacity. But there are a number of games i do really want to play, that i can't get elsewhere. I'm just waiting for the price to drop significantly into my 'impulse buy' region, where i can grab one and a bunch of games, and enjoy the whole thing.

cj iwakura

Lumines, FFT, Valkyrie Profile, Riviera, Street Fighter Alpha 3, Gitaroo Man, and Crisis Core: FFVII are all reasons why the PSP's nothing to take lightly.

I'm still not fond of the system(no internal memory, crap battery life), but like any Sony system, the software'll make up for it.

Captain K

DeaconKnowledge wrote: »

Had the DS Never existed, the PSP would not be looked at as a failure. Unfortunately for Sony, the DS changed what the definition of 'success' for a handheld.

I'd say the standard was set by the GBA, but any way you look at it, Nintendo has pretty much been unchallenged in the handheld market for a couple of decades now.

If anything, the fact that the PSP is still hanging around in the face of the DS should be viewed as some kind of success. How long did the Game Gear last? The Neo Geo Pocket Color? I'll check wiki and google for some data, maybe there's some interesting comparisons to be made.

Couscous

I don't mock the PSP. I think part of the problem is that a lot of people expected it to trounce the DS, but it failed to do that, and now the DS is getting a lot more titles. There were also some stupid statements in the beginning.

"The button's location is [architectured] on purpose," Kutaragi added. "It's according to specifications. This is something that we've created, and this is our specification. There was a clear purpose to it, and it wasn't a mistake."

Offering additional testimony praising the handheld, Kutaragi said, "I believe we made the most beautiful thing in the world. Nobody would criticize a renowned architect's blueprint that the position of a gate is wrong. It's the same as that."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_Portable_games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ds_games

Mace1370

I actually owned PSP before I ever got a DS. The idea of so many awesome RPGs on the go was too good to pass up. However, I ended up selling it because:

1. UMD load times are atrocious and really ruin the portable gaming experience. Really, this is my biggest complaint.
2. The first good RPG to come out in the US was Valkyrie Profile... which came out like a year or two after the system launched.
3. Sony actively fighting against the homebrew community with firmware updates that added nothing other than anti-homebrew code.

hambone

Yeah not to mention portable GTA, Metal Gear Solid, Katamari, Disgaea, Syphon Filter and Daxter.

Plenty of good reasons to buy a PSP.

I'll just wait until prices come down a little.

cloudeagle

I wonder how much the failure of UMD movies contributed to people's negative impressions?

Personally, I think it's the fact that good games for the PSP were, for a time, very few and far between, with little to distinguish them from their PS2 counterparts. That's gradually starting to change now that the system has finally collected a decent library. I'm pining for some Ratchet and Clank.

bongi

do sony make money on psps yet?

DeaconKnowledge

bongi wrote: »

do sony make money on psps yet?

According to Sony, for a good long while. 6-8 months in, I believe.

DewtheKingAJD

I own both, and I play both, and if I had to give one up, I'd give up the DS.

The PSP thumb stick sucks, no one can argue with that, but the fact I can put music, browse the net, use it minimally with my PS3, and play games on it makes it a keeper for me. I value the DS and I have a lot of fun with it, but its games rarely keep me playing. I like both handhelds, and though I have less negative things to say about the DS, I simply enjoy the PSP more.

bruin

The PSP is a success because it's the only handheld to ever not be completely crushed by Nintendo's to the point of actually dying. Software sales are horrid and it's getting trounced worldwide now in the hardware department by the DS, but for a handheld gaming system it's doing pretty well. Well enough that they'll make a PSP2.

There are a handful of worthwhile games (to me) on the system, and I'm probably going to buy one eventually. Hopefully they'll drop the price and redesign the hardware in the next year or two.

Kor

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds. GBA and DS. Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Kiwistrike

The PSP offers an experience which is too similar to that of a last-generation console. And it is pretty unspectacular when compared to said consoles. The fact that its portable doesnt really mean much to me. However, I never actually play portables anywhere except my house, and I dont think the DS is that great either, so I'm not too jazzed on portables either way.

Captain K

Captain K wrote: »

If anything, the fact that the PSP is still hanging around in the face of the DS should be viewed as some kind of success. How long did the Game Gear last? The Neo Geo Pocket Color? I'll check wiki and google for some data, maybe there's some interesting comparisons to be made.

According to Wikipedia, the PSP launched in the US in March '05, so it's coming up on a two-year anniversary of continued support and game releases.

By comparison (Wiki says) the NGPC launched in the US in August '99, and its support really only lasted until June '00, when all backstock was recalled to be re-flashed and sold in the Asian market. So it's hard to argue that the NGPC even lasted a single year in North America.

I'm having trouble finding any kind of significant dates for the Game Gear (the Wiki doesn't make things immediately obvious), but it looks like it hung around in North America for about six years of real support (~1991 - ~1997), and has been re-released in new forms a couple of times since then.

Wikipedia wrote:

Though its sales success has been surpassed by the Sony PSP, the Game Gear is still the longest supported handheld console not made by Nintendo to date.

So, there you go. Looks like the PSP is the best-selling non-Nintendo handheld ever?

If anyone can contradict what I've posted here, or elaborate, please do!

jclast

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds. GBA and DS. Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Because it has games that people want to play?
Because it has other nifty functions as well?
Because we like a little variety?

Take your pick. All are decent answers as to why their needs to be competition.

Lindsay Lohan

Personally, the weakness of the PSP to me is that many of the games seemed to be very much the same exact games you'd play on a console, which really isn't what I want in a handheld. Sony seemed to push giving gamers a PS2-type experience in their hand, but that's not what most people want for quick on the road games. Nintendo really gets what makes a great portable title.

I may consider one later, with a price drop, mostly for Wipeout and Hot Shots Golf (which I love without equal) but for now it was a case that the games didn't match my current interests.

Threepio

Time for a price drop

I never really understood the motivation behind UMD Movies. You want me to pay the same money I would for a DVD... for something I can only play on a 4" screen... That has 2 hours worth of entertainment value at most.

Er... No?

Kiwistrike

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds. GBA and DS. Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Well, it doest have unique hardware advantages... which are uniquely not flush with traditional handheld qualities. So at least they are trying to change what handhelds are all about.

Echo

I'm very interested in the PSP hardware, and the potential it has - should Sony open it up more. As it is now it requires plenty of hacks to do the really interesting stuff with it.

cj iwakura

The only person I know who has a PSP doesn't use it for games at all, he uses it as a media player. So take that for what you will... and he's an XBL addict.

Zombiemambo

My PSP definitely doesn't get much love, but the amount of worthwhile games have been a bit on the low side. It's sitting in my room gathering dust, but one of these days when I get some disposable income I'll pick up the games I have missed.

Captain K

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds.

I'm sure a lot of Neo Geo Pocket Color owners would disagree with your use of the term "all".

Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Uh... what? A competing product makes things more difficult for the consumer? I don't really think you're making a lot of sense here.

Kor

jclast wrote: »

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds. GBA and DS. Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Because it has games that people want to play?
Because it has other nifty functions as well?
Because we like a little variety?

Take your pick. All are decent answers as to why their needs to be competition.

But couldn't those games have been on the DS?

What other nifty functions? you mean, all those features that people mock the PSP for attempting to provide, when other things, such as iPods do better?

Variety, at a cost? why?

Couscous

DeaconKnowledge wrote: »

bongi wrote: »

do sony make money on psps yet?

According to Sony, for a good long while. 6-8 months in, I believe.

Then why haven't they lowered the price recently? The hardware sales were down 72 percent when compared to the 2005 holiday season.

Chen

The PSP is still very popular in Japan largely thanks to its solid exclusives such as Monster Hunter. The sequel sold 700,000 copies in its first week which is nothing to laugh at. You can't call it a failure because a competitor does a better job at penetrating the market and supplying a healthier library. That's like saying the N64 failed. I can't imagine the PSP2 not coming out in the near future, unless Sony is in real financial trouble.

Kor

Captain K wrote: »

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds.

I'm sure a lot of Neo Geo Pocket Color owners would disagree with your use of the term "all".

Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Uh... what? A competing product makes things more difficult for the consumer? I don't really think you're making a lot of sense here.

Normally, a competing product makes things for the consumer better, but only when a monopoly is abusing its consumers. Now, Nintendo has never really abused their handheld market in any way. Thus, throwing in a competitor seems to be mucking things up, more than helping.

In other words.

If the PSP didn't exist, I'd of still bought a DS, and enjoyed its games, plus those that would have been pulled from the PSP and made on the DS instead.

Now though, the PSP does exist, and in order to enjoy all the great games, I have to purchase 2 consoles, when the first was doing a great job at being awesome.

Death of Rats

Chen wrote: »

The PSP is still very popular in Japan largely thanks to its solid exclusives such as Monster Hunter. The sequel sold 700,000 copies in its first week which is nothing to laugh at. You can't call it a failure because a competitor does a better job at penetrating the market and supplying a healthier library. That's like saying the N64 failed. I can't imagine the PSP2 not coming out in the near future, unless Sony is in real financial trouble.

Errr... the N64 kinda is considered a failure by a lot of people. Even hardcore Nintendo fans.

Kiwistrike

Captain K wrote: »

Kor wrote: »

Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Uh... what? A competing product makes things more difficult for the consumer? I don't really think you're making a lot of sense here.

Yeah, because you have to buy two, whereas, if all the good games were on one handheld, you would only have to buy one.

Now theres still a flaw in the argument, but thats the logic.

DeaconKnowledge

Captain K wrote: »

DeaconKnowledge wrote: »

Had the DS Never existed, the PSP would not be looked at as a failure. Unfortunately for Sony, the DS changed what the definition of 'success' for a handheld.

I'd say the standard was set by the GBA, but any way you look at it, Nintendo has pretty much been unchallenged in the handheld market for a couple of decades now.

If anything, the fact that the PSP is still hanging around in the face of the DS should be viewed as some kind of success. How long did the Game Gear last? The Neo Geo Pocket Color? I'll check wiki and google for some data, maybe there's some interesting comparisons to be made.

I disagree.

The PSP hanging around so long can be attributed to a few things that are oft neglected:

1. The ease of ports - This was supposed to be the system defining achievement; developers could easily transition PS2 games to the PSP, netting them huge profits over doubled resources. Now with the PSP languishing, the reason you are still seeing the level of support is because of this; it's like a free money revenue stream. This is the reason that 3rd party devs in America haven't all but jumped ship entirely. Notice all the PSP/PS2/Wii ports recently? There's a reason for that.

2. It's other multimedia functions. The PSP's software sales are pathetic for a hardware that is seeing rather robust software sales. People aren't using the PSP to play PSP games. The elephant in the room with the PSP is that it's a great emulation device, and a cheap poertable movie player. Piracy is moving hardware, and this is evident because of the anemic movement of PSP software and the outright death of UMD movies.

Pata

titmouse wrote: »

I don't mock the PSP. I think part of the problem is that a lot of people expected it to trounce the DS, but it failed to do that, and now the DS is getting a lot more titles. There were also some stupid statements in the beginning.

This is likely it.

Everyone expected Sony to deliver the "final blow" to Nintendo, by taking the handheld market. Nintendo would lose all hope of ever succeeding in the video game business again. And when Nintendo showed the DS everyone was now sure of it.

What was this? Two screens? What? What is this? Everyone thought Nintendo had gone crazy. "Lol Nintendo is doomed" was at it's all time high.

And then the DS became a smash hit, beating not only the PSP, but beating everything. The sheer shock of it turned the PSP into a joke, and started the now visable "lol sony" trend.

DeaconKnowledge

titmouse wrote: »

DeaconKnowledge wrote: »

bongi wrote: »

do sony make money on psps yet?

According to Sony, for a good long while. 6-8 months in, I believe.

Then why haven't they lowered the price recently? The hardware sales were down 72 percent when compared to the 2005 holiday season.

Uh, why would they lower the price on a profit-making hardware?

Lindsay Lohan

Echo wrote: »

I'm very interested in the PSP hardware, and the potential it has - should Sony open it up more. As it is now it requires plenty of hacks to do the really interesting stuff with it.

I've never understood this argument. I understand that initially, when the library was weak that many turned to emulators to give them a good library. And as illegal as it is, having hundreds of Genesis/SNES games in your hand would probably be pretty awesome. However, with any exploits allowing "homebrew" (which 99% of the time means emulators) comes allowing people to find way to pirate games.

What benefit to Sony is there to let people freely make software for the PSP, open themselves up to a bigger piracy issue, and basically give people a reason to buy a console but not actually need to buy software?

The games are improving on the PSP, and the focus is shifting away from movies, which is good. Sony just really needs to push the PSP in advertising as a game platform and put some money behind stuff like Jak and Ratchet.

Karf

When I got my PSP, I was so excited. Sony + Handheld = tons of awesome franchises and great times to be had. I bought Lumines and Wipeout and launch. I played the fuck out of them for a while, and then.. I stopped playing it altogether.

It started gathering dust. I bought Liberty City stories in an attempt to make me play it again, but even that didn't do it for me. I loved the game, but when I played my hands would cramp up and hurt. For me, the PSP is too heavy, the controls on the system are laid out pretty bad. On the bright side, the screen beautiful.

I am so dissapointed with my PSP. It makes me so sad.

jclast

Kor wrote: »

jclast wrote: »

Kor wrote: »

Up until the release of the PSP, all good handheld games were released on the Nintendo Handhelds. GBA and DS. Now, I'm not normally one for monopolies, but Nintendo didn't really seem to abuse this monopoly, in a way that hurts the consumer.

So, my question is, why do we, as consumers, support this second company, when all it does, is make our lives, as consumers more difficult, in that we have to purchase a second handheld gaming device?

Because it has games that people want to play?
Because it has other nifty functions as well?
Because we like a little variety?

Take your pick. All are decent answers as to why their needs to be competition.

But couldn't those games have been on the DS?

The PSP is more powerful than the DS, and I'd be willing to bet that there are PSP games that simply couldn't be done as well graphically on the DS.

Kor" wrote:

What other nifty functions? you mean, all those features that people mock the PSP for attempting to provide, when other things, such as iPods do better?

Yes. Some people don't have and iPod. Some people don't want to carry both a handheld gaming device and a music player. Some people want to watch movies on an airplane without needing a portable DVD player or a laptop. Some people want all of those things in one sleek package. The PSP is perfect for them.

Kor wrote:

Variety, at a cost? why?

Why not? We have three home consoles. All have fun games on them, and the market is better for it. Developers will strive to make better games if they're not ever guaranteed that their audience owns the target platform.

Competition is good for the consumer. If the PSP is doing well, Nintendo's going to step it up and vice versa. The end result? Better handhelds and better games for everybody.

No Great Name

What is this thread about?

Emulation?