So I've been playing the new Chrono Trigger for DS (very good imo btw). I realized how much more convenient a larger screen would be... So I started looking into the DSi XL. Nintendo's website states that it has a 93% larger screen(s). This is where I get confused...
The website says that it's 93% larger. It also says that the DSi was a 3.25" screen and the DSi XL has a 4.2" screen. I'm no mathematician, but 3.25 X .93 (93% in a calculator right?) = 3.0225". Add that to the original size of 3.25" and a screen 93% larger should weigh in at 6.2725". Last time I checked, 6.2725" is much larger than 4.2".
If I subtract 3.25 from 4.2 I get .95". This is about 29.25% larger than the original 3.25" screen of the DSi.
So... Again, I'm no mathematician.... And unless I'm missing something major mathematically. HOW THE HELL DID THEY GET THAT IT'S 93% LARGER??
Screen Size comparison: http://www.nintendods.com/meet-dsi-xl-size.jsp
Reference screen that boasts a 93% larger screen: http://www.nintendods.com/meet-dsi-xl.jsp
Just bored at work. Thanks :)
Tags:
-
-
Your math compared the DSi to the DSi XL, but Nintendo is claiming the 93% figure in reference to the DS Lite, not DSi. (Even then, the math doesn't work, I'm just pointing out what they're comparing.)
According to Wiki, the comparison is of screen area, not diagonal size.
The DS Lite's screen LxW measurements are 62mm by 46mm, meaning 2,852mm total area. The DSi XL's LxW measurements are 85mm by 64mm, meaning 5,440mm total area. 93% of the DS Lite's total area is 2,652.36mm. 2,852 + 2,652 = 5,504mm.
It's not quite 93% larger, but pretty close, right around 91%. Actually, it could very well be 93% exactly, since there's probably an error in the way I obtained the millimeter equivalents of the screen measurements. Online converters rely on decimals for precise measurements, but decimals go up to 10 before iterating to the next number, while inches go up to 12 before iterating to the next foot. This means that if you enter 5.5 inches into a converter, it reads that as five and one-half, but half a foot is actually six inches, so you wind up with a conversion discrepancy.
Factoring in the conversion error, yeah, 93% seems right. -
Yea, you have to go by total area not the diagonal screen measurement.
-
AHHHHH
That actually makes perfect sense. See, I knew there was an problem in my math screwing it all up.
On a side note, the new Blue Dragon for DS is also a major win imo. Wish it were a console game. -
I got that a WHILE ago, haven't played it yet. Glad to hear it's worth playing.
Have you played Fire Emblem Shadow Dragon? It's a great game, people grumble about it's difficulty, but if you're old school like me, you'll enjoy it. -
Also keep in mind, Mor, that while the screen is 93% larger, the resolution is the same.
That's why I ain't biting on this one. Smaller, sharper screen > big pixely screen.
I'm waiting to see what the 3DS is going to be like. -
For the record, I am talking about Blue Dragon:Awakened Shadow that just came out in May (might have leaked earlier, I wasnt really watching). Not the Original Blue Dragon DS than wasn't a real RPG.
I have never been able to get into a fire emblem game, but i'm mad old school so I'll give it a shot. -
Gotta warn you, it is straight old school; a remake of the original NES game - the first SRPG ever. So it's more about gameplay than story, it's unforgiving and brutal, just how games used to be when we were kids.
I enjoyed the hell out of it, but I absolutely LOVE SRPGs.