The screen res and CPU power are pretty much garbage even for classic consoles, looks more like another kickstarter scam to me even if they do make it.
Say what now? I'm not sure if you're blatantly trolling, or just really just don't know what the heck's going on. The GCW's specs are perfectly sufficient for classic console and arcade emulation. I've used, and seen people use older PC's with worth specs as this for the basis of their machines. The 1Ghz + Vivante GC860 + 512 MB of RAM is completely fine, far from calling it garbage.
And how is this a kickstarter scam? There already has been a prototype run of these units (about 150) and has been in the scene for the last year or so. That's much more lead-way than most products you see on kickstarter, and the fact that the play-tested proof is out there even strengthens this product as the real-deal. Over at
http://boards.dingoonity.org/gcw-zero/ there are tons of threads you can sift through that have people showing off the GCW they got in the prototype run, so saying this is just another scam is completely indignant.
Ok down to the nitty-gritty:
320 isn't wide enough for CPS1
Fair enough. There will be scaling there...not the end of the world. Given that most CPS1 and 2 games have very solid ports to home systems as an alternative. But really, at a screen size this small, unless you've got your nose right up to the screen, scaling will be acceptable visually.
240 isn't high enough for a lot of PS1 screens which run in interlace mode, nor is 320 wide enough for a great number of titles.
The PSX's native output ran multiple resolutions, including progressive modes at 240p, while only a handful of games supported higher, for instance Crash Bandicoot, and Wipeout 3. A majority of titles (and the PSX's library was probably the largest in console history) ran at 240p and 480i.
But why the heck would you want interlaced mode for this screen anyways? What's the point of line-doubling/scan-lining when your screen's resolution is 320x240?
I think this is a by-product of today's retro gamers. Most people play retro games on emulators, and naturally have their computers, xbox's, PSP's set to higher resolutions with up-scaling happening. So they think, that's the way its supposed to be. Back in the day, no one talked about TV resolutions as extensive as now. Most people don't know that Standard Resolution is 640x480 (roughly VGA), but older consoles actually outputted half of that and were interlaced (line-doubled) to display at standard def. Hence 480i.
Here are the native non-interlaced modes of the PSX (240p):
256 x 240
320 x 240
512 x 240
640 x 240
Here are the interlaced modes (480i):
256 x 480
320 x 480
512 x 480
640 x 480
See what I"m getting at here? You get a crisp image at progressive scan running at the native resolution without having the hardware push harder to double the line output. Which connects back to my earlier point of the specs being completely adequate.
240 won't work well with games of NTSC resolution, you'll get black bars, or very ugly scaling effects.
PCE, SNES etc. all do higher res too. even Genesis on occasion.
This is a little facetious.
NES/Master System/Snes/Genesis all ran at 256×224 natively.
MSX = 256×192
ColecoVision = 256×192
Atari 2600 = 192x160
DOS games = mostly ran at 320x240
N64, like the PSX had most games that ran at 320x240, but some games had the ability to run at 640x480, but not a lot of them.
Basically anything made earlier than the SNES ran lower than 320x240 natively.
Sega Saturn can output a display resolution of 320×224 and higher, but it's similar to the PSX, some games were programmed to do so.
Are you really concerned about an 8 pixel black-bar, at the top and bottom? Back in the day, you'd still get the same thing, but the only difference is that on CRT's you had control over the vertical geometry that your monitor's v-scale. Unfortunately with LCD technology, we can't get that type of control (see my many rants on why CRTs are so much better than LCDs). Heck, even some of the cheaper TVs back then didn't have v or h-scale potentiometer, and compensated by having the shroud overhang the view-able image!
But come-on, an 8 pixel bar is not the end of the world.
Based on control layout it doesn't look like something you'll be able to rotate either, so you'll be stuck playing vertical games in the middle of a tiny screen and even then find the screen isn't big enough even for pacman (224x288 resolution, hence why many old home ports had to scroll & move the status bar to the side) sure you could scale it down but that will just look ugly and/or use more cpu power.
Looks pretty good to me:
http://youtu.be/3t0aR4W3KRQ?t=1m47sI don't know why you think you can't play this in vertical mode. If you can play Dodonpachi with it looking this good, pacman is a no-brainer.
The screen is physically 3.5". That's roughly the same size as an Iphone4's display, so if you've played games on your phone as a touch screen and display, I'm pretty sure you'll be fine without being encumbered by your fingers getting in the way on this screen.
Basically if you thought the NeoGeo Gold X whatever it's called handheld was junk (and it was, plus they were just running hacked up copies of FBA) then this is no better.
Wrong.
A. you don't need to hack up this unit, or get SD adapter hacks to get more games/other emulators on it (if there even is anyone supporting other emulators for the NGX)
B. The physical buttons on the GCW are reported to be of higher quality than the NGX. The NGX doesn't even have a d-pad!
C. NGX has less RAM.
D. NGX has less storage.
E. NGX has no wifi, no hdmi out.
F. NGX doesn't have an Accelerometer!
G. NGX doesn't have a mic! (think about the multiplayer gaming possibilities on the GCW...)
Clearly the GCW is better.
at best you're likely to get some sub-par ports of the existing emulators for the linux platforms it runs, offering the same sub-par emulation you've always seen with no real improvements, and the product has no real reason to exist at all beyond the hype of it being yet another kickstarter project people are willing to pump endless money into for little outcome. this offers nothing new over kit you could buy years ago.
maybe I should start my own to create the worlds best multi-game emulator, then just copy the mame source with a few tweaks, because it's REALLY not much different to what these guys are doing when it comes to existing handhelds.
sorry to be so negative over this, but bleah.
Please watch the videos previously linked. The emulators that have been (easily) ported from the dingoo already show a vast improvement from previous revisions. It even out performs the PSP ports, which a lot of people think is better, and are clearly wrong.
Again, the proof is in the pudding here. The early prototyping really helped push this "hype" to reality, and has jazzed a lot of people who understand what this unit really is, and what they want to use it for.
Honestly, if you want to take on an endeavor like this, please by all means. Not everyone has the funds to be able to just jump into the hardware industry, and if you do, then you're one of the more well-off ones. Heh, in fact, I'd love to see your solution for supporting multiple screen resolutions for emulating all the different hardware, without scaling, black-bars, and scrolling...better put a patent down on a screen that can physically shrink and grow to fit all sizes. Some kind of organic technology perhaps?
Granted, haters are gonna hate. For me, from the research I've done on what the current options for easily portable retro gaming are out there, all signs point to this unit being the best there is. Everything else seems to be either cheaply made, no longer supported, or require hardware/firmware hacking. I just want something easy, and for a price point of $135, this little unit is definitely the top pick.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Send this topic
Print
Topic: Exciting looking emulation portable - GCW:Zero. Now kickstarted (Read 52289 times)
