Every single topic about 3DS will have people going on about waiting for the second version, but it pretty much never comes up regarding the PS Vita. Yet there are now more models of PSP than there are of DS.
And even with home consoles, the Wii has recently had a cut down cheaper version announced, but Sony and Microsoft announced new SKUs on a seemingly monthly basis, even aside from the Slim/Elite redesigns.
Yes, Nintendo do make a lot of changes to their handhelds, and yes waiting for the improved version is a sensible idea. But why does Nintendo take all the flack for the practice?
And yes, I know I'm just going to get flamed for being a fanboy, but this has irked me for a while and I needed to rant.
--
"I'm Commander Shepard, and you're standing in the biggest library in Citadel Space. Look me up."
I would imagine it has something to do with the fact that when you have a bigger fanbase, and you do something that fanbase doesn't like, there's going to be more discussion of said thing being done than there would be for something from a smaller fanbase being redesigned.
Because Nintendo (like Apple) tries to make their new revisions of hardware the "mandatory" version and tries to obsolete your version.
Sure, there are a bunch of PSPs, but you never feel like you're missing out on anything because you have a 1000 instead of a 3000. Same with PS3s and Xboxes for the most part.
Well, the big flak the new Wii is getting is because of the lack of GC BC... it's actually pretty much the exact same flak Sony got for getting rid of PS2 BC.
-- _foolmo_ 'so I can potentially win the guru without getting the final right?' - BlAcK TuRtLe
foolm0ron posted... Well, the big flak the new Wii is getting is because of the lack of GC BC... it's actually pretty much the exact same flak Sony got for getting rid of PS2 BC.
The big difference being that you didn't need a PS2 controller to play certain PS3 games properly.
From: foolm0ron | Posted: 8/26/2011 4:47:08 PM | #003 Because Nintendo (like Apple) tries to make their new revisions of hardware the "mandatory" version and tries to obsolete your version.
really? DSi and DSi XL are "mandatory"?
it's seriously mandatory to have DSiWare, which has like a grand total of 5 "good" titles?
DSi XL is mandatory? so EVERYBODY needs a behemoth system with stretched screens that completely shatters the idea of a "pocket" game system? I mean XL was even advertised to be an optional DSi, selling them next to each other like "if you want a small one, you have this, or if you want the big system you can get XL"
Hell, DS Lite isn't even mandatory at all. brighter screens big whoop, me and my brother were fine on our DS Phats
Because Nintendo (like Apple) tries to make their new revisions of hardware the "mandatory" version and tries to obsolete your version.
Sure, there are a bunch of PSPs, but you never feel like you're missing out on anything because you have a 1000 instead of a 3000. Same with PS3s and Xboxes for the most part.
Just how many physical games actually required DSi? None I can think of that have rendered the DS "obsolete," that's for sure.
From: foolm0ron | Posted: 8/26/2011 5:15:14 PM | #010 So when Sony tries to do what Nintendo usually does (like with the Go), they get similar, if not way more, flak as Nintendo
so I think we can conclude that this isn't a Nintendo problem, but a make-crappy-cash-grab-product problem
what
the flak Nintendo and Sony get are entirely different
Sony gets flak for making crappy revisions like Go and Bizarro-Go. Nintendo gets flak for making revisions that are better than their previous models
then all the anti-Nintendo folk always say "wah why get a 3DS now when they'll make a 3DSi Lite XL", and then hype up the Vita as a day 1 purchase
GuessMyUserName posted... so you're saying that people should hold out for a 3DSi XL because Nintendo will "try" to make it mandatory over 3DS, despite that not being true
that
is your argument
They tried to make the DSi the replacement with DSiWare. Once again, operative word being "tried".
Most of those PSP / PS3 / 360 revisions aren't worth mentioning. They're different SKUs, but they are hardly a notable upgrade, not to such an extent that you potentially hold out / sell and re-purchase the hardware. The slim versions of those systems are noteworthy, but not some minor adjustments, like increased harddrive size or button changes. Bigger harddrives become cheaper for Sony and Microsoft to order than smaller as time goes by, which is why you see new PS3 and 360 SKUs, but they've only had one real cosmetic change.
Alternatively, Nintendo will put out a fairly standard model to begin with, improve on dramatically in the first revision, and then continue messing around with it from there. If I'm not mistaken, didn't the DSi completely change the interface and add in an online store? That's pretty significant, and something you can't take part in if you own the DSL, which itself was a big enough upgrade to ditch the original model if you owned it. Nintendo tends to do this with far more frequency than everyone else, too, which is why "will wait for a revision" mentality is so common.
From: Phase | Posted: 8/26/2011 5:33:09 PM | #019 GuessMyUserName posted... so you're saying that people should hold out for a 3DSi XL because Nintendo will "try" to make it mandatory over 3DS, despite that not being true
that
is your argument
They tried to make the DSi the replacement with DSiWare. Once again, operative word being "tried".
by "not being true" I don't refer to the "try" statement, I refer to the fact that they didn't actually make a mandatory replacement
ZFS posted... Alternatively, Nintendo will put out a fairly standard model to begin with, improve on dramatically in the first revision, and then continue messing around with it from there. If I'm not mistaken, didn't the DSi completely change the interface and add in an online store? That's pretty significant, and something you can't take part in if you own the DSL, which itself was a big enough upgrade to ditch the original model if you owned it. Nintendo tends to do this with far more frequency than everyone else, too, which is why "will wait for a revision" mentality is so common.
This. It's not so much giving them s*** for it and more like we've figured out how they operate.
-- I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo Now this is entertainment!
GuessMyUserName posted... by "not being true" I don't refer to the "try" statement, I refer to the fact that they didn't actually make a mandatory replacement
Okay. Let's try this from a different angle, then.
If you accept that Nintendo tried to do so, your argument basically boils down to trying being inconsequential because Nintendo will assuredly completely fail at doing so because Nintendo has no business sense, cannot learn from their mistakes, and cannot learn from any other successful model.
From: Phase | Posted: 8/26/2011 5:56:00 PM | #022 Nintendo will assuredly completely fail at doing so because Nintendo has no business sense, cannot learn from their mistakes, and cannot learn from any other successful model.
it isn't just nintendo who gets flak. psp didn't get much because bluntly, nobody owned or CARED to own a later PSP. the best stuff you can do on a psp was for the majority of its life reserved for the 1000 units and the early 2000s. there's a couple differences - such as 2000 having 64MB of RAM to the 1000's 32MB - but nobody cared enough. it gained traction late in its life and nobody gave a damn about what they did then. the PS3 though? it got a lot of crap - rightfully so! - for releasing like 8 different PS3 models. to the extent Nintendo gets, no, and that's unfair but eh.
ditto goes for the 360. the Wii didn't change at all and that was one of the perks it had. it simply would not change. the DS line only got a real jump with the DSi. DS Lite changed form factor and brlghtness level - that's it. DSi added in the camera and online store, and was them trying new stuff. with that said, the DSi was well into the DS's career and isn't something you can really knock them off for; if a DSi was what you were going for in the first place you simply dind't care what the earlier ones could do. GBA was a big difference, but that's really it. Sony and MS simply haven't had the time to pull this off really. MS didn't change the Xbox for the life in 'em, and the 360 went through half a dozen revisions and there were people who waited, if for no other reason, RROD. Sony didn't change the PS1 or PS2 much (the big one was the Slim), but PS3 they got crapped on early on for a number of reasons, including the multiple skus. PSP was just a joke early on so nobody cared.
come next gen, you'll see the attitude spread because nobody likes what Sony or MS pulled off this gen.
--
The future must protect the clone's past. "Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel.
The DSL improved more than that. It made the system smaller and lighter, put in a new screen and brightness levels, improved the battery life, and lessened the amount of time for a recharge, completely redesigned the buttons. That's pretty much an across the board improvement.
...form factor and brightness is.... everything you said there. 'cept the battery life i guess, but nobody had any problems with the original DS' battery life anyway so that's a moot point. it was an improvement sure, but it wasn't that big a change, deal, and did NOTHING to the original owners either.
--
The future must protect the clone's past. "Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel.
Well, PSP 2000 was a pretty major improvement. 3000, I like the sound of but I'm not gonna buy one. Go is okay. Losing UMD-only titles is bad but it's a nice system design-wise.
--
"God Hand is the ultimate expression of the joy of humanity, specifically the punching part of the joy of humanity."-Shigeru Miyamoto