Doesn't this sound like a perfect
Xperia Play
#1
Posted 07 April 2011 - 01:45 PM
Doesn't this sound like a perfect
#2
Posted 07 April 2011 - 07:12 PM
#3
Posted 07 April 2011 - 07:56 PM
Emulators will play much more nicely with these buttons. That's certainly a selling point, although Sony will never admit this.
#4
Posted 08 April 2011 - 02:18 AM
I'm pretty sure the Xperia isn't as strong as either of those. Especially the 3DS. I saw it on PSP Hacks a while back, and it ran graphics worse than the PSP at 23 Frames per Second.It's more powerful than the PSP and 3DS, yes, but it's not by far as powerful as the NGP.
Emulators will play much more nicely with these buttons. That's certainly a selling point, although Sony will never admit this.
#5
Posted 08 April 2011 - 07:31 AM
That's of course dependent on how efficient the non-graphics part of the game code is.I'm pretty sure the Xperia isn't as strong as either of those. Especially the 3DS. I saw it on PSP Hacks a while back, and it ran graphics worse than the PSP at 23 Frames per Second.
Besides, I assume that those graphics you saw were 3D, weren't they? I think that phone could handle complex 2D (e.g. physics engines) quite well. And most Game Maker games are 2D, since game maker is too bad on 3D
So... 2D could work. Especially 2D with buttons.
539, since your words and Phantom's words clash, I'll believe in him. Have you looked into the hardware specs or something?
Edited by Yal, 08 April 2011 - 07:33 AM.
#6
Posted 08 April 2011 - 07:59 AM
The Xperia Play has a much more powerful CPU than the 3DS and PSP, making it very suitible for, as Yal said, complex 2D physics engines.
However, the Xperia Play is not as powerful on the GPU-side, so 3D graphics will be a real struggle. The screen of 480 x 854 pixels isn't helping that either. It needs to fill 480 x 854 = 409920 pixels. As a comparison, the 3DS and PSP combined run on an effective resolution of 480 x 272 + 800 x 240 + 320 x 240 = 399360 pixels total. The performance of the Xperia Play gets ruined because of the huge resolution. But as it's great on the CPU side, it makes it all the better for GBA and N64 emulators!
So how powerful it is depends on how you look at it.
On a side note, it makes me wonder how beastly the NGP is as it outputs much higher quality graphics on an even higher (960 x 544) resolution.
#7
Posted 08 April 2011 - 08:14 AM
I always look at it from the 2D sideSo how powerful it is depends on how you look at it.
What is the NGP? Googling the abbreviation didn't help.
#8
Posted 08 April 2011 - 08:17 AM
Really? Google-ing it for me works perfectly and gives good results.I always look at it from the 2D sideSo how powerful it is depends on how you look at it.
. Thanks for clarifying.
What is the NGP? Googling the abbreviation didn't help.
Here is the topic on the GMC: http://gmc.yoyogames...howtopic=497302
#9
Posted 13 April 2011 - 08:08 PM
By the way, I need to get an archenemy. It's not fair that Yal gets one and I don't.
teasing.
#10
Posted 13 April 2011 - 10:30 PM
#11
Posted 14 April 2011 - 05:45 AM
#12
Posted 23 April 2011 - 09:05 AM
#13
Posted 27 April 2011 - 08:42 AM
#14
Posted 09 June 2011 - 05:03 PM
#15
Posted 09 June 2011 - 05:08 PM
Emulators will play much more nicely with these buttons. That's certainly a selling point, although Sony will never admit this.
This.
A phone with a decent emulator will make me happy: aside from the fact that I'd need to jailbreak my iPhone to install emulators, the lack of buttons make these emulators a royal pain anyways.
#16
Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:05 AM
The lack of physical buttons make anything on a touch-screen device a pain.Unless Zeddi says otherwise.the lack of buttons make these emulators a royal pain anyways.
#17
Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:55 PM
#18
Posted 21 June 2011 - 07:51 PM
Touchscreens are pretty cool for point-and-click adventure games. For anything else it's balls.
Touch screens work for arcade games but not for games like FPSs or platformers.
#19
Posted 06 April 2012 - 04:31 AM
#20
Posted 23 June 2012 - 06:20 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











