Psp Vs Gp2x?

[DaveC]

You are still confused it seems. I never claimed what I said was fact. I was accusing you of mistaking my opinion for fact! You must be so desperate to get into a fight with me over this (presumably because you hate widescreens for some reason that is still unknown to me) that you had to misinterpret me on purpose :rolleyes:.

Whatever, I read the statement by you "I said you would be able to display more on the screen at once" And that is not a true statement. I just went on to explain why and correct it. I am not sure how I misinterpreted that, looks pretty straightforward. It was never meant as an attack or flame. I didn't start any fight, just corrected an error. I guess now I am a "troll" because I correct a false statement. Pretty lame. It is a big misconception by many nowdays that "widescreens give more viewing area" I hear it alot and it is just not true. Resolution and size are what allow more to be displayed. That is just a fact. I try to explain why but it seems it ends up in a flame fest, can't help it. This thread is a flame war anyway so no loss. Everything from PSP cpu speed, emus, widescreen, which scene is better, which has netter controls, etc is being argued.

I don't hate widescreens either. They may not be ideal for some things like emulators but are fine for original titles or movies. That has little to do with the original post.

 

[Anhaedra]

He started this fight, thus is a troll.

Ban him! Ban him! Off with his head!

 

[Exophase]

Everyone, please

There's merit to both arguments.. okay granted I haven't read all of it (because I assume a lot of it is same old same old) but I do think that while DaveC brings up some worthwhile points there's a serious flaw in what he's saying. Sometimes you can get wider much more easily than you can get larger while maintaining 4:3. We're talking about handheld LCDs and 240x160 over 160x144 is more feasible than 256x240, 480x272 over 320x240 is more feasible than 480x320, these are cost issues and as far as I know you pay more for vertical than horizontal (that and it longer probably works better than taller for portability).

So it really is improved resolution, for what people were willing to spend money on.

EDIT: Just so I don't have to back it up in another post, the point I'm trying to make is that sometimes going wider is the same thing as going higher resolution.

 

[foleyjo]

Im a troll too! I live under a bridge and wait for billy goats to try and cross and then I pop out and threaten them.

As he is a GP2X GURU I think DaveC and other Guru's should not be abused in this way as they do a lot of work for the GP2X community. Especially when they are just stating facts.

Respect your Guru's people

 

[quartercast]

Im a troll too! I live under a bridge and wait for billy goats to try and cross and then I pop out and threaten them.

As he is a GP2X GURU I think DaveC and other Guru's should not be abused in this way as they do a lot of work for the GP2X community. Especially when they are just stating facts.

Respect your Guru's people

Yes, I agree. Moving right along... Let's talk about GPH's latest LCD technology as it goes head-to-toe with Sony... the NarrowScreen GP2X! This groundbreaking technology makes vertical shooters a dream to play, but leaves platformers looking slightly anorexic when stretched to full height. GPH, as always, is combating this by doubling the number of components, in which a second screen is connected to the GP2X and powered by the second CPU. Unfortunately, you can only buy a developer version of this screen at the moment, which has no housing and bare wires sticking out of it. The commercial version will be released approximately 1 year later and will require an external power supply. Peace out!

 

[Exophase]

Im a troll too! I live under a bridge and wait for billy goats to try and cross and then I pop out and threaten them.

As he is a GP2X GURU I think DaveC and other Guru's should not be abused in this way as they do a lot of work for the GP2X community. Especially when they are just stating facts.

Respect your Guru's people

Yes, I agree. Moving right along... Let's talk about GPH's latest LCD technology as it goes head-to-toe with Sony... the NarrowScreen LCD! This groundbreaking technology makes vertical shooters a dream to play, but leaves platformers looking slightly anorexic when stretched to full height. GPH, as it always does, is combating this in its usual manner by doubling the number of components, in which a second screen is connected to the GP2X and powered by the second CPU. Unfortunately, you can only buy a developer version of this screen at the moment, which has no housing and bare wires sticking out of it. The commercial version will be released approximately 1 year later and will require an external power supply. Peace out!


You joke, but look at the resolution on cell phone platforms like N-Gage ^_^

 

[foleyjo]

You joke, but look at the resolution on cell phone platforms like N-Gage ^_^

Speaking of N-gage how about an emulator. Or at least some kind of port of Pandemonium. My girlfriend always steals my phone so she can play it and by the time I need to make a phonecall ive got no bettery left so if she can play it on the GP2X instead it will be much appreciated.
i have tried the PSX version but its too slow for her on the current PS Emulator

 

[DavidBeoulve]

Sorry Orkie, but I had to sig this, it's just beautiful when taken out of context and just applied to all human communications:

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but you aren't entitled to your own facts." - DaveC

 

[DaveC]

Im a troll too! I live under a bridge and wait for billy goats to try and cross and then I pop out and threaten them.

As he is a GP2X GURU I think DaveC and other Guru's should not be abused in this way as they do a lot of work for the GP2X community. Especially when they are just stating facts.

Respect your Guru's people

Thanks but I don't think "Guru" should have anything to do with it. I don't think "Gurus" should have anymore respect than others. I think we can argue without getting abusive. We should not be abusive to anyone, or at least try not to, I know it is hard sometimes and I am guilty of doing it sometimes too.

I think debating is OK and I don't think of it as "fighting". Sometimes people take it personally though like I am fighting with them. They shouldn't though.

Everyone, please

There's merit to both arguments.. okay granted I haven't read all of it (because I assume a lot of it is same old same old) but I do think that while DaveC brings up some worthwhile points there's a serious flaw in what he's saying. Sometimes you can get wider much more easily than you can get larger while maintaining 4:3. We're talking about handheld LCDs and 240x160 over 160x144 is more feasible than 256x240, 480x272 over 320x240 is more feasible than 480x320, these are cost issues and as far as I know you pay more for vertical than horizontal (that and it longer probably works better than taller for portability).

So it really is improved resolution, for what people were willing to spend money on.

EDIT: Just so I don't have to back it up in another post, the point I'm trying to make is that sometimes going wider is the same thing as going higher resolution.

You kind have backed up what I have been saying. My main point is that resolution determines how much you can see on screen, not the shape of the screen. I think in the case of GBA it may just be that 240 x 160 is just 1/2 of 320 x 240 or 1/8 VGA. Alot of screens are based on VGA resolutions. Full VGA considered 640 x 480.

Although I have to disagree with you that wider makes things more portable. Wider aspects are less efficient with space. Look at the PSP, it is so long due to the screen format. With the PSP it made sense to be widescreen though as Sony was hoping to sell UMD movies on it and movies are widescreen. It wasn't intended to run emus as it's primary use.

Sorry Orkie, but I had to sig this, it's just beautiful when taken out of context and just applied to all human communications:

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but you aren't entitled to your own facts." - DaveC



Well I can't take credit for it really. I heard it somewhere (not on these boards) , I didn't invent it, I just parroted it back

 

[daibo]

My main point is that resolution determines how much you can see on screen, not the shape of the screen. I

While it may be true for 2d games, it isn't for 3d games, in 3d games the view angle decides how much you see from the level. That's why in Starcraft you couldn't change the resolution but in Warcraft 3 you could. Did you ever experienced bigger viewable area in Warcraft 3 after raising resolution?

Widescreen is actually considered better by those who establish it because it resembles the human field of view more than 4:3.

 

[Alex.]

2D content dominates this scene, so it's only natural that we're suggesting what works best for it, not for 3D.

 

[Vollgasasi]

in 3d games the view angle decides how much you see from the level.


Widescreen is actually considered better by those who establish it because it resembles the human field of view more than 4:3.




these two sentences are exactly what i wanted to say all along lol. thanks for helping me out! man i'm an idiot.

2D content dominates this scene, so it's only natural that we're suggesting what works best for it, not for 3D.

you're right alex, but that's not what the discussion is about.


also, i would like to end this discussion about widescreen now. i started it and so i end it.
i think we're all right in some way.
davec says, that a 17' widescreen display has actually less pixels than a 4:3 17' display which is right, thus losing viewing space.
orkie says that it's easier for him to code stuff in widescreen because of the added horizontal space (for adding toolbars etc)
alex says that 4:3 is better for emulating consoles (which until recently have all been 4:3 consoles) which is also very right.
and i say what daibo says, which is also right. =)

END

 

[DaveC]

My main point is that resolution determines how much you can see on screen, not the shape of the screen. I

While it may be true for 2d games, it isn't for 3d games, in 3d games the view angle decides how much you see from the level. That's why in Starcraft you couldn't change the resolution but in Warcraft 3 you could. Did you ever experienced bigger viewable area in Warcraft 3 after raising resolution?

Widescreen is actually considered better by those who establish it because it resembles the human field of view more than 4:3.


Well just take that view angle on your widescreen now, then add more on the top and bottom. At that point you see more than you did because you added pixels. Why? because, again , it is resolution that determines how much you see not the shape. I don't know why so many have trouble with that.

I don't know about Warcraft but it must be limitation of their engine. With 3D you should be able to set the resolution to anything. If you can't it is a limitation of their renderer, that is all.

Your eye and retinas are round and they aren't that far apart. This would mean that you would see actually not much wider than tall.

 

[trooper]

***CLOSED***

This topic is really not going anywhere, Wash, Rinse, Repeat etc.

Everyone IS entitled to their own opinion and to state fact when facts are needed.

But when facts and opinions collide and there just does not seem to be a resolution,
The only way to end this constant to-ing and fro-ing of facts and opinions is to close the topic.

***CLOSED***

Trooper