# Nvidia Project Shield: handheld console with retina screen



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 7, 2013)

Um this looks shit.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 7, 2013)

just think if it had a apple logo on it


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 7, 2013)

Imagine if it had an Nintendo logo on it? It'd be the Virtual Boy 2!


----------



## tommers (Jan 8, 2013)

Ouya must be annoyed.


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 8, 2013)

it does look rubbish though.  the screen's just too small


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 8, 2013)

Not convinced people will buy one over a more versatile tablet, despite the advantage of proper controls. Dedicated handheld consoles are almost dead. I'm be surprised if Sony does another one after Vita.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 8, 2013)

rubbershoes said:


> it does look rubbish though. the screen's just too small


 
5" is a fair size, it's bigger then 3DS XL and the same size as the Vita.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 8, 2013)

Fugly.

I love my white 3ds


----------



## Sunray (Jan 8, 2013)

Looks horrible.
Connecting to my PC is a total waste of time, why would i want to play a game on a 5" display when I have a 24" monitor.
Android is a touch platform.

Up there with the Folio, the biggest invention by far is the problem.


----------



## fractionMan (Jan 8, 2013)

Global Stoner said:


> Not convinced people will buy one over a more versatile tablet, despite the advantage of proper controls. Dedicated handheld consoles are almost dead. I'm be surprised if Sony does another one after Vita.


 
They're really not.  At least not in the kid market.


----------



## elbows (Jul 31, 2013)

This review manages to be quite positive somehow. I can't get past how ugly it looks.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/31/nvidia-shield-review/


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jul 31, 2013)

Yep still think this looks shit.


----------



## editor (Jul 31, 2013)

'Retina' is a meaningless. made up Apple marketing term. That is all.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2013)

editor said:


> 'Retina' is a meaningless. made up Apple marketing term. That is all.


Sort of. It's kinda become a generic term for a high pixel density screen. Certainly more understandable for the average punter than simply quoting pixels per inch figures.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jul 31, 2013)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Sort of. It's kinda become a generic term for a high pixel density screen. Certainly more understandable for the average punter than simply quoting pixels per inch figures.


 

Yeah exactly dunno why anyone would get hung up over it anymore than say Hoover...


----------



## editor (Jul 31, 2013)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Sort of. It's kinda become a generic term for a high pixel density screen. Certainly more understandable for the average punter than simply quoting pixels per inch figures.


 
It's a made up marketing term for a higher resolution screen. And how's it more 'understandable' when people don't know what it actually means past Apple's breathless hype?



> "Retina" is meaningless Apple marketing terminology. Although Apple has yet to release a "Retina" branded iPad Mini, the term is a useless reference. Apple have released several products branded with "Retina" and they vary considerably in resolution and pixel density.
> 
> Retina branded Apple displays are not the best available. The highest density Retina display that Apple offers is in the iPhone 4/5 at 326 PPI. As an example, here are a couple of products with better pixel density:
> HTC One: 468 PPI
> ...


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2013)

Because people know exactly what it means. A lovely looking screen that's sharp and not slightly fuzzy like screens of old. That's all most people will care about, the actual specs beyond that are irrelevant.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jul 31, 2013)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Because people know exactly what it means. A lovely looking screen that's sharp and not slightly fuzzy like screens of old. That's all most people will care about, the actual specs beyond that are irrelevant.



Indeed for your average user that's very true.


----------



## editor (Jul 31, 2013)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Because people know exactly what it means. A lovely looking screen that's sharp and not slightly fuzzy like screens of old. That's all most people will care about, the actual specs beyond that are irrelevant.


So what happens when the screen goes above the loosely and vaguely defined 'Retina' resolution? How will they know that it's a better screen?

It's marketing bollocks, pure and simple, and as that quote above explains quite clearly, and it's not even an accurate description. 


> The math just doesn’t add up, said Raymond Soneira, president of DisplayMate Technologies, who explained that the iPhone 4′s purported “retina display” was a misleading marketing term.
> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2013)

editor said:


> So what happens when the screen goes above the loosely and vaguely defined 'Retina' resolution? How will they know that it's a better screen?


We've already got to the point where any more pixels makes no visible difference. It's the camera megapixel thing all over again.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 31, 2013)

Now we just need laptops to catch up!


----------



## ChrisFilter (Jul 31, 2013)

It works though, doesn't it, and so in that regard it makes sense to use it.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 2, 2013)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> We've already got to the point where any more pixels makes no visible difference. It's the camera megapixel thing all over again.


 

Yep.


----------

