DaveC said:
Well the analog WOULD replace any kind of buttons that could be used for MAME type arcade stuff. Playing 320 high stuff on a 480 high screen would result in a fractionally scaled small image making them not worth playing.
Boohoo. Whoever said it'd be possible to vertically orient the thing anyway? Besides, you could still fit buttons in that region, depending on how you did it. You just happen to think emulating vertical MAME cabinets is more important than whatever benefits analog could give you. A lot of people would disagree with you.
DaveC said:
For some reason though as you said this will have 3D and it seems like that is all everyone wants for some odd reason. I guess Xbox, PS2, Xbox 360, PS3, DS, PSP, PC etc aren't enough for 3D. We need everything to be 3D oriented I guess. I mean running n64 and a Quake port is all that matters right?
You're one of those people who knows how to really force a bad argument (and do it over and over again). Pretty much every console/handheld ever made has some kind of support for 2D graphics, why do we need more of that?
Why this 3D has potential:
- Modern 3D acceleration allows better than 2D acceleration than any 2D accelerator I'm aware of
- Enables better emulation of PS1, the most popular platform ever made
- People are actually interested in making 3D games
- It's better than the 3D on any other handheld we have. Especially DS. That kinda sucks.
- Not a lot of people are doing 3D homebrew for PSP anyway, may as well try a platform people actually do homebrew games for.
But of course running vertically oriented MAME games so that they take up as much of the screen as possible is all that matters right?
TheMinder said:
There's more than a couple of things that are confusing me ( I've probably mentioned some of them before so apologies for any repeats ).
QUOTE
I fully expect craig to make a machine that isn't just costing what people expect to pay for a machine that does such and such, but something where you really get what you pay for.
If I'm reading that correctly then that's surely a fallacy. As others have already said ultimately this is being done as a business venture and so surely profit has to be one of the main driving forces behind it. There's nothing wrong with that by the way, it's just strange for board members here to try to take some sort of ownership over it as a "community project" when it's actual a commercial venture.
Secondly, I know the thread was put up and it did the job of getting some interest and making a long and active read but are board members not getting a false impression of the importance of their input into the whole thing ?
Speccing a machine to suit say 100 people who have replied in the thread is hardly going to happen as it would make no business sense at all, and surely the market being aimed at has got to be wider than just members of this board ?
The thread would strongly suggest that some people like SQUIDGE for example are being utilised in a professional capacity behind the scenes which makes complete sense (I chose SQUIDGE semi-randomly but could have gone for maybe SKEEZIX as a professional developer etc etc) , and if a business man like Craig (and whoever else is backing) has got professional people involved then I find it hard to believe the machine isn't fully specced out and designed already without relying on the input of board members, who let's face it could all still be at school.
There's a huge difference between "doing something for profit" and charging as much money as you think people will be willing to pay. Of course the market is broader than this board, but that doesn't mean that the opinions here don't represent a realistic sampling of that market. It's a lot better than the kind of input companies tend to get when designing a machine (which is basically nothing). At the very least gp32x users should reasonably accurately represent the tens of thousands of GP2X owners.
