There's a thing the DS and the PSP have that the Zune HD, the Droid and the iPhone don't have: controllers...

DS made popular the concept of handheld games with touchscreen, but they keep the regular controls, so the software companies can use one or both, the result: A whole variety of games, and look at the platform, selling a million on Black Friday in their 5th year... The name says it all: "Developer's System" (and Dual-Screen, both are the official terms)...

PSP can have only games controlled traditionaly, and the rest can only have touchscreen games (unless they use multitouch to simulate traditional), so they're covering only one part of the market...

So suddenly games require dedicated controllers to work? Didn't the Wii prove that you could change the input device significantly and still sell games, especially to a new audience? Why do you need a controller to play a game? I mean, my phone doesn't have a controller, but I have no problems playing Chrono Trigger on it.

Don't we argue blue ocean all the time here? Why would it be any surprise that someone quickly one-ups what Nintendo did with the creation of the handheld market? The iPhone/iPod family has sold as fast if not faster than the DS has (60m install base today), and Android is beginning to lap the PSP (1.5 million units sold in November, give or take, 6m units sold in year one and will see 30 million+ next year).

I understand that controllers are good, but the fact is that each generation has poised new control concepts, and many of them have led to new emergences in playability (joysticks, rumble packs, touch screens, montion sensing, ect). Also, for a phone, it would be easy to merely port over a virtual controller - as stated, they've already done that with every emulator on Android (again, I can play Earthbound flawlessly with no keyboard - its even easier with a keyboard).

Its important to think outside the box here. Nintendo did it with the DS and Wii - is it any wonder that someone else can think outside the box and make a great gaming device that no one saw coming?

Are you comparing the DS sales against the iPhone/Droid sales??? the iPhone and the Droid are selling not because of the games, the iPhone sells because it's an iPod phone, people want it primarily because of what made the iPod famous in the first place plus the touchscreen plus the phone itself... People want the DS primarily because of the games...

That may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that the iPhone (as well as any other smartphone) are becoming much more apt gaming devices. 5 years ago cell phones had soduku and tetris for their main games. Today they are getting backing from every major developer and are starting to see major series such as Madden and Grand Theft Auto being delivered to the platform.

And to think outside the box? Zune HD is not outside the box, hell, iPhone is not outside the box, at least not in gaming, they're both using an already famous way of gaming, and all started with the DS, Ninty is the true pioneer in that field, and major software companies back it up more than the other platforms...

That doesn't mean that someone can't do it better. Sony didn't pioneer the optical disc for gaming when the PS1 launched, but they still decimated Nintendo because they did a better thing.

Handheld gaming is at the same crossroads. Phones are becoming more capable for gaming devices while handhelds become......Nothing different. The issue is that the install base of phones is vastly larger. Although not everyone will game on phones, I think its very illogical to argue that the iPhone/iPod user base for games will not be a major consideration when it is beating the DS 2:1 in terms of install base in a few years. Phones will continue to increase thier capabilities and penetration. 1 billion cell phones are sold per year. What happens when a majority of them can play games similar in quality to Animal Crossing? Also, why do you think Nintendo added social abilities to the DSi if they felt that gaming would suffice?

You should also know that the DS wasn't the first device with a touchscreen on it. Before the DS, there were smartphones that used similar touchscreen technology that Nintendo took and implemented for the DS. So I'm not understanding the whole 'pioneer' aspect. Yes, they added a touchscreen to their handheld, but again it wasn't the first gaming device to actually have it, it was just the first that did it well. Today, touch screens on phones are FAR, FAR more responsive for gaming, and theres no intelligent way you could think otherwise. Can the DS even do multitouch for its touchscreen? Does it have an accelerometer?

And look at my last paragraph, i'm saying that the PSP and the iPhone/Droid/Zune HD/etc. are only covering one part of the market, while the DS covers them all, at least in gameplay...

It doesn't cover the market. I've been talking about marketshare, not game types. That is something Nintendo can't entirely get itself around because the DS still has the constraints of being a DS - that is, you have to get someone to justify a purchase of $149.99 to buy a gaming system that does very little else. Whereas you can get an Android phone or iPhone for less, and have far more abilities PLUS pretty decent games.

If they don't wanna add traditional controlling, that's fine by me, but i don't think they will make traditional controlling in handhelds obsolete...

Your correct. It will make dedicated handheld devices obsolete. You heard it here first, but we have one more generation of dedicated gaming handhelds before they are integrated into other devices, or wind up being very anemic. As stated, the blue ocean for mobile users to play games vastly, VASTLY outweighs whatever success Nintendo has had. Of course, Nintendo should get in the marketplace business and build a virtual DS if they want to keep their handheld dreams alive in the future.

Are you comparing the DS sales against the iPhone/Droid sales??? the iPhone and the Droid are selling not because of the games, the iPhone sells because it's an iPod phone, people want it primarily because of what made the iPod famous in the first place plus the touchscreen plus the phone itself... People want the DS primarily because of the games...

That may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that the iPhone (as well as any other smartphone) are becoming much more apt gaming devices. 5 years ago cell phones had soduku and tetris for their main games. Today they are getting backing from every major developer and are starting to see major series such as Madden and Grand Theft Auto being delivered to the platform.

And to think outside the box? Zune HD is not outside the box, hell, iPhone is not outside the box, at least not in gaming, they're both using an already famous way of gaming, and all started with the DS, Ninty is the true pioneer in that field, and major software companies back it up more than the other platforms...

That doesn't mean that someone can't do it better. Sony didn't pioneer the optical disc for gaming when the PS1 launched, but they still decimated Nintendo because they did a better thing.

Handheld gaming is at the same crossroads. Phones are becoming more capable for gaming devices while handhelds become......Nothing different. The issue is that the install base of phones is vastly larger. Although not everyone will game on phones, I think its very illogical to argue that the iPhone/iPod user base for games will not be a major consideration when it is beating the DS 2:1 in terms of install base in a few years. Phones will continue to increase thier capabilities and penetration. 1 billion cell phones are sold per year. What happens when a majority of them can play games similar in quality to Animal Crossing? Also, why do you think Nintendo added social abilities to the DSi if they felt that gaming would suffice?

You should also know that the DS wasn't the first device with a touchscreen on it. Before the DS, there were smartphones that used similar touchscreen technology that Nintendo took and implemented for the DS. So I'm not understanding the whole 'pioneer' aspect. Yes, they added a touchscreen to their handheld, but again it wasn't the first gaming device to actually have it, it was just the first that did it well. Today, touch screens on phones are FAR, FAR more responsive for gaming, and theres no intelligent way you could think otherwise. Can the DS even do multitouch for its touchscreen? Does it have an accelerometer?

And look at my last paragraph, i'm saying that the PSP and the iPhone/Droid/Zune HD/etc. are only covering one part of the market, while the DS covers them all, at least in gameplay...

It doesn't cover the market. I've been talking about marketshare, not game types. That is something Nintendo can't entirely get itself around because the DS still has the constraints of being a DS - that is, you have to get someone to justify a purchase of $149.99 to buy a gaming system that does very little else. Whereas you can get an Android phone or iPhone for less, and have far more abilities PLUS pretty decent games.

If they don't wanna add traditional controlling, that's fine by me, but i don't think they will make traditional controlling in handhelds obsolete...

Your correct. It will make dedicated handheld devices obsolete. You heard it here first, but we have one more generation of dedicated gaming handhelds before they are integrated into other devices, or wind up being very anemic. As stated, the blue ocean for mobile users to play games vastly, VASTLY outweighs whatever success Nintendo has had. Of course, Nintendo should get in the marketplace business and build a virtual DS if they want to keep their handheld dreams alive in the future.