New And Improved Unified Xgp Design Poll

[Epicenter]

This is a new, improved version of the previous poll on a site that doesn't suck as badly. Now you can view the results correctly. However, if you voted before please do so again! Thanks!

I've created a large off-site survey for many hardware aspects of the XGP/XGPmini systems. It includes Chipset/CPU, RAM, Resolution/Aspect Ratio, Control method, WiFi connectivity, and numerous other options. This seems more coherent and unified than numerous smaller polls. Once there's a significant range of responses, I'll send the result to GamePark. I'm also making a link to the poll from some other GP2X/GP32-related forums, and the relevant Wiki pages.

Please let me know if there is anything you see that needs to be changed. Thank you!

The survey is here:
http://www.misterpoll.com/3504739794.html
There's a 'View Results' link up at the top.

 

[slaanesh]

One wee little problem with this type of poll - we don't know the associated negatives to adding various parts. The biggest negatives I can think of are cost and possibly reduced battery life.

For example, selecting the uber GFX chip may make the unit ie. US$50 more example and drain the batteries twice as quickly tjhan the more humble GFX option.

So, the poll results ending up with a device that has all the uber specs, but is expensive and needs a car battery to power it for any reasonably amount of time.

I realize these polls are to get user feedback but I think some imposed limitations need to be added into it to make it more realistic and useful.

ie. Each component should have an assoicated price and the end design should not exceed whatever the budget for the hardware components might be.

 

[aapje89]

the poll reflects my opinion nicely , except for the fact that I would rather have AA's than a rechargable lithium-ion cell.

 

[rei_yano]

here is the digg for it http://digg.com/gaming_news/Gamepark_XGP_a...i_redesign_poll just in case you guys want to know. grab an account and bump this up as far as possible.

 

[Epicenter]

One wee little problem with this type of poll - we don't know the associated negatives to adding various parts. The biggest negatives I can think of are cost and possibly reduced battery life.

For example, selecting the uber GFX chip may make the unit ie. US$50 more example and drain the batteries twice as quickly tjhan the more humble GFX option.

So, the poll results ending up with a device that has all the uber specs, but is expensive and needs a car battery to power it for any reasonably amount of time.

I realize these polls are to get user feedback but I think some imposed limitations need to be added into it to make it more realistic and useful.

ie. Each component should have an assoicated price and the end design should not exceed whatever the budget for the hardware components might be.

Yes, I understand and see where you're coming from, but that's not really feasible. It's not like shopping for parts since GP will be buying units in bulk, and the costs will vary based on the purchased volume; whether they get a discount on the S3C2460 or not might depend on if they bought Samsung's LCDs, etc. Just too many factors to say for certain.

Regarding battery life-- if anything, the S3C2460, while fancier, has the same basic graphics chipset as the VRender-3D. It also uses 1.5V to power its numerous cores, while the VRender-3D requires 1.8V. The DSP unit only requires 1.2V. (This is at 266 Mhz ARM9 clock, 100 MHz DSP clock, by the way.) If anything power consumption should be significantly lower.

The questions are for the most part based on decisions GP is trying to make that they've described to me, that will be influenced by user opinion-- hence the poll.

EDIT: Also, Rei -- I dugg the story; hopefully others follow suit.

 

[Epicenter]

The results are kind of baffling right now; way different than the previous polls. Also, the people who've voted so far (around 40) mostly seem in support of different resolutions for the XGP and XGPmini, which I didn't think many people approved at all. Strange.

 

[Vimacs]

many results are realy not the way i would like them, but hey its a vote...

 

[rei_yano]

:lol: jaqms is spamming the poll?? j/k

 

[Epicenter]

:lol: jaqms is spamming the poll?? j/k

Oh, you never know. Honestly I don't like how you can vote a few times before it stops you for 'abuse'; that is why I'd prefer a forum based solution where you need to sign up and all of that. But, it makes it harder for casual visitors to vote, people who wouldn't vote if they had to sign up .. though maybe that's for the best since they would make a more informed call?

It's a dilemma, to be certain. I wouldn't raise concern if the results weren't the exact opposite of what was expressed by voters from gp32x before, and that's the main place I've advertised it thus far (it doesn't appear to have garnered much interest on Digg yet and it was only recently added to the Wikipedia entry.)

For example, I haven't heard but a few people say they'd prefer an internal LiIon cell, nearly everyone who commented was in favor of AAs, especially DaveC. Most people thought using 2 different resolutions was a terrible idea, and preferred a cross-shaped DPad which here, is barely getting more votes than an Analog stick that was preached against by many. It's suspicious, is all.

 

[Orkie]

Your previous surveys weren't without bias. The fact that you held them only here meant that there was a huge bias. Also, only the people who make a lot of noise have really bothered to make their views heard.

My vote can account for one for the li-ion battery and for the two different resolutions. However, I didn't vote for the cross shaped d-pad, but the round one.

 

[JaqMs]

These polls won't really work, as asking for a request also needs a reason. You really have to give GP a little bit more flexibility so that they can feel that their final specs will reflect both their own decisions and ours. Don't build the entire handheld for them or else they may feel overwhelmed by the power by numbers.

And a 480x276 resolution on the XGP Mini?

 

[Epicenter]

These polls won't really work, as asking for a request also needs a reason. You really have to give GP a little bit more flexibility so that they can feel that their final specs will reflect both their own decisions and ours. Don't build the entire handheld for them or else they may feel overwhelmed by the power by numbers.

And a 480x276 resolution on the XGP Mini?

GPH was an example where they would've done better to let someone else design the console for them. You of all people would probably attest to that. I'm not saying GP doesn't have a better idea of what they are doing, but they could use some nudges in the right direction. A great deal of the GP2X's success, the vast majority of it in fact, is due to portability of existing software from systems like the GP32, emulation of of other machines and running PC software-- much of which would not cooperate with a different aspect-ratio display. That's the reason so much doubt surrounds the XGP Kids-- everyone will be starting from the ground up on the platform, and it won't have the springboard-to-fame that got the GP2X dev scene off the ground-- emulation and ports.

But the bigger issue, as I see it, is compatibility. Let's face it, it's a big task to juggle trying to code for 2 handhelds with different resolutions and control schemes, and potentially different RAM configurations. If you're developing, let's say, a high-end 3D game .. and you can make use of 48MB of RAM, but the XGPmini will only have 32, but the XGP will have 64.. do you scale back the game to run on both, crippling it for the XGP to make it run on the XGPmini? Or do you alienate the XGPmini buyers by making it an XGP-only title? Different resolutions are worse, as they make developers pick and choose a resolution. Most non-3D games can't run at 2 resolutions without redrawing most of the graphics, so devs will need to stay with 320x240 and letterbox the game on the XGP, or scale it to fit the display (which would look hideous) .. or develop it for 480x272 and, again, excude XGPmini buyers from being able to run it.

On a slightly less serious note, there's the matter that you'd be hard-pressed to judge which machine a program was running on, XGP or XGPmini- and determine what scheme of control a program should be using. Making the user specify when he runs an app if he's using an XGP or an XGPmini is a bit odd. You could offer two builds, but that adds unnecessary complication, at least in my opinion.

I'm sure that in the end GP will make a decision that's best for them financially and design-wise, while also taking some (but probably not all) our preferences into account. But as we all know from the GP2X, it's best to avoid little fiascos like the '2x's stick early on, because it becomes pretty much impossible to correct something like that later without a PR nightmare (people would want to return GP2X's en masse if a D-Pad were added, in all likelihood..)

 

[woogal]

For example, I haven't heard but a few people say they'd prefer an internal LiIon cell, nearly everyone who commented was in favor of AAs, especially DaveC. Most people thought using 2 different resolutions was a terrible idea, and preferred a cross-shaped DPad which here, is barely getting more votes than an Analog stick that was preached against by many. It's suspicious, is all.

I voted for liIon, 16:9 on the XGP and 4:3 on the mini, and analog on both (and I only voted once). Maybe the other people who also voted that way didn't post on your previous threads for the same reason as me - they get really frustrated by the fact that 99% of people on this forum care more about emulation than innovation. All of your previous threads were full of people saying '16:9 is crap for emulation', 'analog is crap for emulation', and I know from experience that it's impossible to have a rational conversation with people who have that kind of attitude to new hardware.

 

[Epicenter]

Good point, such discussions generally go down in flames. My greater concern is that the majority of games, emulated or not, don't work that well with analog control. Platformers and puzzle games spring readily to mind. I'm developing a shooter at the moment, and after that an FPS and an air combat game are the plans .. which work fine with analog. But there are LOTS of puzzle games developed for the GP32/GP2X, I'd hate to play them with an analog stick. And whether it's innovative or not, the systems have to at least accomodate emulators decently, since that's what's going to build up a large enough community to accomodate any serious quantity of developers in the first place...

 

[JaqMs]

Yeah, I pretty much voted for the specs they currently have, with the exception of the 2D/3D processor chip. And as everyone knows, I agree with woogal's emulation argument. Why make the screen smaller so that it has the perfect emulation experience but causing many potential programs that need the widescreen to become impossible? Once again, it's all about adaptation.

 

[Shikaku]

potential programs that need the widescreen to become impossible?

What kind of programs actually would use this except for movie players? Really, what programs? Show me some homebrew examples that exist RIGHT NOW.

 

[JaqMs]

Well, a web browser would actually look presentable. I can't imagine a 320x240 website display. Then there could be a text viewer that could display text without all the ugly line wrapping. Also, porting 640x480 programs could retain most of the original quality with some sacrifices, unlike on 320x240 where it would be unseeable.

For example, the developer of Megazeux (an ASCII game) successfully ported it to PSP, though I don't know how complete it is. Then it got ported to GP2X but no one could read the text. So that is yet another useful purpose of the widescreen.

Why -don't- you want the XGP to have a widescreen, regardless if you like the XGP or not?

 

[Shikaku]

web browser

Is not presentable in a handheld unless it is of a high resolution, like 640x480. Widescreen just makes text easier to read because of the longness of the text, which makes it looks less cramped because it is wider. You can notice that almost all books have either a very oblong or a very tall page, for this reason. However, who consistantly reads text and webpages on a game machine again?

porting 640x480 programs

Ever programmed before? Right, you REALLY know what you're talking about! I bow to your programming skills on being able to radically change the resolution from 4:3 to 16:9.

no one could read the text [Megazeux]

http://archive.gp2x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,26,1727

See comments about not being able to read text?

Why -don't- you want the XGP to have a widescreen, regardless if you like the XGP or not?

Read above please, and previous post. 16:9=NOT FOR GAMES.

 

[DaveC]

Well, a web browser would actually look presentable. I can't imagine a 320x240 website display. Then there could be a text viewer that could display text without all the ugly line wrapping. Also, porting 640x480 programs could retain most of the original quality with some sacrifices, unlike on 320x240 where it would be unseeable.

For example, the developer of Megazeux (an ASCII game) successfully ported it to PSP, though I don't know how complete it is. Then it got ported to GP2X but no one could read the text. So that is yet another useful purpose of the widescreen.

Why -don't- you want the XGP to have a widescreen, regardless if you like the XGP or not?

The aspect of the screen is not "better" one way or another in itself. The "better" aspect is the one that best matches the source material. So that means 4:3 is better for games, even video like TV shows, designed for 4:3 screens and 16:9 is better for movies as that matches better. Widescreen doesn't give you any more play area than 4:3 AT ALL however. I could say that a widescreen display is just a 4:3 screen with the top and bottom cut off giving LESS screen area. What matters most is RESOLUTION and only resolution. That is the thing that will give more detail.

The other issue is that widescreen doesn't fit handhelds as well because it makes them longer. You have buttons and a controller taking up real estate on the face too. It is an inefficient format for the space. A 4:3 screen with the same AREA is a more efficient use of space and allows the unit to be more compact and have the same screen area.

I am almost inclined to say fine give the XGP a widescreen and analog stick. If you want emulators we already have the GP2X for that. If you want movies and original 3D games and 3D homebrew an analog would be better. Otherwise we just have 2 units competing for the same market (emus).

 

[JaqMs]

web browser

Is not presentable in a handheld unless it is of a high resolution, like 640x480. Widescreen just makes text easier to read because of the longness of the text, which makes it looks less cramped because it is wider. You can notice that almost all books have either a very oblong or a very tall page, for this reason. However, who consistantly reads text and webpages on a game machine again?

porting 640x480 programs

Ever programmed before? Right, you REALLY know what you're talking about! I bow to your programming skills on being able to radically change the resolution from 4:3 to 16:9.

no one could read the text [Megazeux]

http://archive.gp2x.de/cgi-bin/cfiles.cgi?0,0,0,0,26,1727

See comments about not being able to read text?

Why -don't- you want the XGP to have a widescreen, regardless if you like the XGP or not?

Read above please, and previous post. 16:9=NOT FOR GAMES.

My gosh did you butcher my sentences. Ok, there is a reason that websites predominantly scroll vertically; because the horizantal aspect of websites are usually fully displayed on the screen. Do most websites scroll horizantally? No. Therefore, the widescreen can adequately display the full length of a site. Then you attack my comment by saying that the GP2X/XGP is not a PMP, but simply a gaming machine.

Guess what, I programmed before. How about quoting the full sentence before rediculing my statements...

And have YOU ever played Megazeux? I am one of the few people IN THE WORLD that knows and (sometimes) actively uses Megazeux. Therefore, you really don't know what they're talking about when they mentioned "dialog boxes".