charlequin
Banned
Fourth Storm said:
I say "if I had my druthers" all the time. :lol
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo 3DS Announced: New 3D handheld (no glasses!), reveal @ E3, out by March 2011
- Thread starter john tv
- Start date
- Status
I say "if I had my druthers" all the time. :lol
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Except for the main system RAM only being 24MB I agree.Donnie said:
I didn't mean any of those points as knocks against the systems, or as meaning only Nintendo hardware has bottlenecks... just that it seems like they choose to add them in for no reason whatsoever. They bottleneck something that has no perceivable gain for them or the end user.
lostinblue
Banned
I'd go with the framebuffer other than that main RAM thing.Thunder Monkey said:
The RAM was because... well, 1T-SRAM was more expensive than regular SD-RAM back then and let's lot forget it was DDR clocked at 333 MHz whereas even xbox 1 had 266 MHz one at place.
It was less of a bottleneck on the system, but it was a bottleneck considering how much you could fit in there (specially when it came to ported games who didn't use texture compression originally)
DonMigs85
Member
I believe its frame buffer was just the right size for fitting 640 x 480 or 448, though I do wonder how much better or worse it would have performed if Nintendo stuck with the original 202 MHz Flipper, 405 MHz Gekko specs. Also a 128-bit bus for the 1T-SRAM would have been nice.lostinblue said:
P.S. Xbox had 200 MHz DDR actually (400 MHz effective). As far as I know the 1T-SRAM is not DDR, 324MHz is its total effective speed.
-WindYoshi-
Banned
Snakeyes said:
The supposed CTR 3DS one was safe to link to, so at least try that.
Father_Brain
Banned
Willy105 said:
...which means they're not GBC-exclusive games, like the ones DrGAKMAN was specifically referring to. Nor does this change the fact that from a year or so after launch (late 1999) until the last GBC games came out in 2002, the vast majority of the system's software was not compatible with GB/GBP.
GBC was a successor system, despite having an abnormally short lifespan. Why some GAFers keep arguing that it wasn't, I'll never know.
DonMigs85
Member
Yes. If you remember Willy, the black Game Boy carts fully supported color on the GBC but could still work on a regular Game Boy (just in B&W, and possibly with missing extras like the color dungeon in Link's Awakening DX). Transparent carts worked only on GBC and would give you a "Not Supported" error if started in a Game Boy Pocket or Super Game Boy.Father_Brain said:
Black-Wind
Member
With all this news I don't know what to think. 0_o
I was awaiting something thats like the GC in power, a spitting distance away from the Wii . . . and now, according to IGN, its closer to the HD twins?
I haven't trusted IGN "insider info" for a LONG time now but thats because of the Wii team over there (Matt C) . . . I have never really looked at the handheld guys so I really don't know what to think of their "insider info".
I was awaiting something thats like the GC in power, a spitting distance away from the Wii . . . and now, according to IGN, its closer to the HD twins?
I haven't trusted IGN "insider info" for a LONG time now but thats because of the Wii team over there (Matt C) . . . I have never really looked at the handheld guys so I really don't know what to think of their "insider info".
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Matt C was probably the most trustworthy guy at IGN. Guy got all the scoops.
lostinblue
Banned
No, if it was just the right size we wouldn't have so many games with dithering, and if the buffer was bigger we'd be seeing more developers doing anti aliasing on it.DonMigs85 said:
On the GC of course, was excusable, but they were bottlenecks that should have been adressed.
I believe you are wrong, it's certainly not DDR266, but perhaps it was DDR200, I never seen anyone calling it DDR400 before and it seems well before it's time too, DDR266 was rare back then, and nintendo had to go with only 24 MB of DDR333... but either way I believe the GC had a better realworld throughput, that's what I always heard anyway (could be from optimization/simplicity/paralelism of the architecture alone though).DonMigs85 said:
GC's 1T-SRAM was DDR, dual channel clocked at 162 Mhz albeit with dual channel. 1T-SRAM was essentially modified (and cloaked) SD-RAM anyway, so having regular RAM at 324 MHz back in 2001 would be quite crazy seeing as most computers only had SD-RAM 133 Mhz even.
shame he was pretty clueless when it came to interpreting that information.Andrex said:
Tech-wise he could have a section of bloopers all for himself (remember when he was making his crusade of "Wii can't make normal maps" and some dude on a interview told him in response to that "erm... we have normal maps? they're not that hard to implement")
Kind of a joke character at times, it got to his head, even if he had the contacts.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
lostinblue said:
Yeah, it did, but he was still better than the rest of IGN.
comedy bomb
Banned
OnPoint said:
for what?
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
comedy bomb said:
Post 12345 and the next megaton.
I believe A 'DSi enhanced' games actually contains two sets of ARM9/ARM7 binaries: one for DS-mode and another one for DSi-mode. Didn't GB-compatible GBC games work like that as well?blu said:
I don't get this discussion some people try to put on about the 3DS not being *the* next-gen handheld because it has "DS" in the name. The GameBoy Advance was the de-facto next generation GameBoy and still had GameBoy in the name.
Using previous consoles naming and hardware as examples of what defines or not "next gen" is useless. Example: the differences between the Wii and the GC are in relatively the same as those between the DSi and the DSLite: same architecture but increased CPU speed, more RAM, added networking/misc hardware, internal/external storage and the addition of an OS-like firmware. However, one was marketed as the next generation while the other was just a hardware revision.
Nintendo needs the 3DS to be viewed as a next generation product, not as a revision, if they want rapid user and developer adoption.
AceBandage
Banned
Then after that, we have to wait until post 2030.
=/
=/
AceBandage
Banned
Screw an official 3DS thread.
This is my home!
This is my home!
comedy bomb
Banned
Andrex said:
I don't remember any prior megatons in this thread.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Making it a negaton.comedy bomb said:
AceBandage
Banned
GDGF said:
I never could get the hang of
abstract alien
Member
Yeah, I say we just update the op in this thread, add a release date and price to the title(if given) and keep it rolling.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
GDGF said:
I'm gonna lay under it like Giles Corey.
I think it's generally a good thing that there really aren't any sweet megatons in this thread. This will probably be the first Nintendo conference worth getting excited for since 2006.
On that note, how about them Nintendo ninjas, eh? The lack of leakage is incredible! How are they keeping this up? Black mail? Death threats? It's almost kind of worrying--if it's really coming out this year, you would think that developers would have been making games for it for a while, now. I hope the launch of 3DS doesn't mirror DS, where there were almost no good games for almost a year.
On that note, how about them Nintendo ninjas, eh? The lack of leakage is incredible! How are they keeping this up? Black mail? Death threats? It's almost kind of worrying--if it's really coming out this year, you would think that developers would have been making games for it for a while, now. I hope the launch of 3DS doesn't mirror DS, where there were almost no good games for almost a year.
Eteric Rice
Member
pirata said:
Japanese company that doesn't tend to talk to the press much = sealed.
We get leaks here because the devs are kind of among us. I'm surprised more don't leak shit on 4chan's /v/ board.
Considering Nintendo hasn't been releasing much in terms of DS games, they'll probably have something. I was wondering about that a few months ago. I figured a new handheld was coming because there wasn't much new for the DS.
AceBandage
Banned
pirata said:
All Nintendo NDAs are signed in blood and enforced by Yamauchi's ever living evil.
AceBandage
Banned
That picture both horrifies me, and makes me want to go out and buy 2 more copies of WiiSportsResort.
Dreamwriter
Member
Nope - those black GB-compatible GBC games really *were* just Gameboy games with color. They weren't able to put the system into "GBC Mode" where the CPU was faster and more memory was available. The code just checked a flag at bootup that would tell it if it was running on a GBC or not, and if so the code could change how a certain part worked, but there definitely wasn't room on the cartridges for two versions of every routine (especially a DMG-compatible cart, those couldn't get nearly as big as the GBC carts could).M3d10n said:
Then the DSi is still the same generation as a black/white DMG Gameboydeku said:
The DS has three different graphic renderers, two 2D renderers (one per screen) and one 3D renderer. Each 2D renderer is exactly what the GBA used - everything is programmed exactly the same way, using the same internal registers, with a few small enhancements (like a mode that lets you use more colors per sprite). And the GBA 2D renderer is actually based on the GBC video system - video RAM is organized the same way, the registers you use to control it work the same (there are just more of them). And GBC's video system was basically the same as the DMG video system too, though it had a couple tricks the DMG one didn't (aside from the extra video RAM setup for storing which color palette is used in which tile). All of Nintendo's handheld generations are evolutions from the previous one. A good way to delineate generations is to base it on equivalent game consoles - the DMG Gameboy was a lot less powerful than an NES, the Gameboy Color was more powerful than an NES. The GBA was more powerful than a SNES, the DS is slightly less powerful than an N64. DSi's CPU is closer to an N64's CPU, but the video system is exactly the same as DS, with the same polygon limitations (one of DS's biggest bottlenecks is a hard limitation on polygons - no matter how fast the rest of the system is, you are stuck with a set number of polygons on the screen). You could make the case that the DSi was the next-gen handheld, except Nintendo didn't market it that way, and in fact proved that false by announcing a "true" next-gen handheld just a year later.
AceBandage
Banned
I'd say the FCC board being revealed is a megaton, considering it confirmed quite a few things for us.
Fourth Storm
Member
Branduil said:
Well, the extremely low resolution sure did help it in that area, but I have to agree with you. Mario Kart with polygonal racers and at 60fps was a huge upgrade.
Do you guys think Nintendo will reveal its graphics partner at E3? Doesn't there DS partner remain a mystery to this day?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I would say the same.Branduil said:
It's peak poly output is really weak though. The N64 smokes it. It has a definite advantage when it comes to textures though. Even without the filtering. :lol
All around I think when utilized well 3D DS games can look acceptable, they just really need a boost. I still expect a GCN-lite handheld. Simplified TEV, poly counts capped at 10 million pps. I expect it to have more ram then the Wii though.
I expect it to do impressive things.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
GDGF said:
The immortal one is pleased. For now.
I really want those glasses.
- Status