The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Handheld gaming has always been popular. To the kids who know nothing about hooking up a console to a TV, the GameBoy has always been saviour. It's the video game system which has had the most games released for it - over 10,000 since release in 1989, and has been home to so many classic's you couldn't count. From Pokemon battling to nicking cars, the GameBoy has always been the console I could turn to for quick fun or retro action.
And I've always loved my GameBoy, my GameBoy Pocket, my GameBoy Colour and GameBoy Advance. Notice the problem arising? GameBoy has always been an ever-changing console. From the start, it was available in more than one colour and ever since then it's grown, changed and morphed. I'm not one to complain, for so long have I played the GameBoy, but compatibility issues are starting to get annoying.
Because... the GameBoy has never had serious competition. The NeoGeo Pocket failed, the Wonderswan Colour hasn't made it outside of Japan and all Sega's efforts have gone down the pan. And still, the GameBoy Advance is selling like hot cakes. The problem I have is that Nintendo will never sit still. The GameBoy Advance has been out here for little more than a year, and already there's talk of a newer version. I don't want to sound ungrateful Nintendo, but I don't want anything new.
If only the GameBoy Advance would have some stiff competition, be it by Sony or Microsoft. A battle of the miniature consoles. That would be very good, because it would be interesting to see just how things turn out. Undoubtedly a handheld with the word 'PlayStation' in the title would win, but the GameBoy has had such runaway success it's hard to tell. One thing's for sure - if the GameBoy wasn't the only serious contender on the market, Nintendo certainly wouldn't keep up with all this upgrading and remodelling crap. They'd have to get it perfect first time - battery life, backlit screen and sufficient technology to stay ahead of the pack for a few years at least. Then I'd be happy.
There's nothing wrong with a bit of competition. I love the GameBoy and all its incarnations, but I don't like having to buy a new one every couple of years. If only Nintendo could stop messing around, build everything into one small ergonomic console and leave it for five years - then I'd be happy(er). So what does everybody else think? Is the GameBoy fine as it is, on the brink of 2D and 3D gaming. Or does it need a technological kick in the pants to get proper 3D gaming, and let Nintendo stop updating the technology and start updating the games (I've had enough of SNES Mario conversions). I know what I'd rather have, and I'm pretty adamant that the same goes for you lot out there. Whatever the case - GameBoy rocks.
And I've always loved my GameBoy, my GameBoy Pocket, my GameBoy Colour and GameBoy Advance. Notice the problem arising? GameBoy has always been an ever-changing console. From the start, it was available in more than one colour and ever since then it's grown, changed and morphed. I'm not one to complain, for so long have I played the GameBoy, but compatibility issues are starting to get annoying.
Because... the GameBoy has never had serious competition. The NeoGeo Pocket failed, the Wonderswan Colour hasn't made it outside of Japan and all Sega's efforts have gone down the pan. And still, the GameBoy Advance is selling like hot cakes. The problem I have is that Nintendo will never sit still. The GameBoy Advance has been out here for little more than a year, and already there's talk of a newer version. I don't want to sound ungrateful Nintendo, but I don't want anything new.
If only the GameBoy Advance would have some stiff competition, be it by Sony or Microsoft. A battle of the miniature consoles. That would be very good, because it would be interesting to see just how things turn out. Undoubtedly a handheld with the word 'PlayStation' in the title would win, but the GameBoy has had such runaway success it's hard to tell. One thing's for sure - if the GameBoy wasn't the only serious contender on the market, Nintendo certainly wouldn't keep up with all this upgrading and remodelling crap. They'd have to get it perfect first time - battery life, backlit screen and sufficient technology to stay ahead of the pack for a few years at least. Then I'd be happy.
There's nothing wrong with a bit of competition. I love the GameBoy and all its incarnations, but I don't like having to buy a new one every couple of years. If only Nintendo could stop messing around, build everything into one small ergonomic console and leave it for five years - then I'd be happy(er). So what does everybody else think? Is the GameBoy fine as it is, on the brink of 2D and 3D gaming. Or does it need a technological kick in the pants to get proper 3D gaming, and let Nintendo stop updating the technology and start updating the games (I've had enough of SNES Mario conversions). I know what I'd rather have, and I'm pretty adamant that the same goes for you lot out there. Whatever the case - GameBoy rocks.
Vottanator wrote:
> I don't see how people can play handheld consoles if they have a
> proper console at home. I just can't go from playing Tony Hawks on the
> Dreamcast to playing Tony Hawks on the GBA. It's impossible. There's
> such a huge difference in the quality and fun factor of the games that
> I can't go from one to the other. 2D platformers are okay because
> they're different and still very playable as graphics-wise, they're
> not too ambitious. It's when you get 3D attempts like F-Zero or Mario
> Kart that cause serious problems gameplay wise. I'm so used to their
> N64 incarnations that I find them totally unplayable on the GBA.
> Still, I wouldn't pay 60 quid for those GBA Mario type platformers
> when I could play them on my original gameboy. Is there really THAT
> much difference? (I suppose that did link a bit with the topic.)
I agree entirely. I don't see the point in AC adaptors and such because I don't play my GBA at home. I only really use it when I'm in the car, or away from home, which is why I don't think small discs would be appropriate (they'd get scratched so easily).
Even so, the state of gaming hand held wise is what console gaming was 10 years ago - 2D games mainly, a wealth of side scrolling platformers and some 'ambitious' games which use mode 7. Thing is, I'd much rather play a 2D side-scroller such as Super Mario World than something like Super Mario Sunshine. The small screen makes detail hard to see, which is why the graphics on the GBA do actually look pretty nice. In actual fact, they aren't too advanced, but because they're so miniscule I don't mind.
And of course, the whole question of ROMs comes into play here. If the GameBoy isn't going to be played at home, what's the point in ROMs? Well, the point is that games such as Pokemon aren't on home consoles - it's portable only. I played Pokemon tonnes when I got it, not just when I was away from my TV consoles. Remember, GameBoys are consoles too.
That's a bit of a mixed issue really. GameBoys are cheap and easy to use because they're essentially old technology. But what's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing.
> I don't see how people can play handheld consoles if they have a
> proper console at home. I just can't go from playing Tony Hawks on the
> Dreamcast to playing Tony Hawks on the GBA. It's impossible. There's
> such a huge difference in the quality and fun factor of the games that
> I can't go from one to the other. 2D platformers are okay because
> they're different and still very playable as graphics-wise, they're
> not too ambitious. It's when you get 3D attempts like F-Zero or Mario
> Kart that cause serious problems gameplay wise. I'm so used to their
> N64 incarnations that I find them totally unplayable on the GBA.
> Still, I wouldn't pay 60 quid for those GBA Mario type platformers
> when I could play them on my original gameboy. Is there really THAT
> much difference? (I suppose that did link a bit with the topic.)
I agree entirely. I don't see the point in AC adaptors and such because I don't play my GBA at home. I only really use it when I'm in the car, or away from home, which is why I don't think small discs would be appropriate (they'd get scratched so easily).
Even so, the state of gaming hand held wise is what console gaming was 10 years ago - 2D games mainly, a wealth of side scrolling platformers and some 'ambitious' games which use mode 7. Thing is, I'd much rather play a 2D side-scroller such as Super Mario World than something like Super Mario Sunshine. The small screen makes detail hard to see, which is why the graphics on the GBA do actually look pretty nice. In actual fact, they aren't too advanced, but because they're so miniscule I don't mind.
And of course, the whole question of ROMs comes into play here. If the GameBoy isn't going to be played at home, what's the point in ROMs? Well, the point is that games such as Pokemon aren't on home consoles - it's portable only. I played Pokemon tonnes when I got it, not just when I was away from my TV consoles. Remember, GameBoys are consoles too.
That's a bit of a mixed issue really. GameBoys are cheap and easy to use because they're essentially old technology. But what's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing.
To tell you the truth, this topic doesn't really concern me as I have no interest in handheld gaming at all.
But since I'm here I may as well voice my opinion (however off topic it may be).
I don't see how people can play handheld consoles if they have a proper console at home. I just can't go from playing Tony Hawks on the Dreamcast to playing Tony Hawks on the GBA. It's impossible. There's such a huge difference in the quality and fun factor of the games that I can't go from one to the other. 2D platformers are okay because they're different and still very playable as graphics-wise, they're not too ambitious. It's when you get 3D attempts like F-Zero or Mario Kart that cause serious problems gameplay wise. I'm so used to their N64 incarnations that I find them totally unplayable on the GBA. Still, I wouldn't pay 60 quid for those GBA Mario type platformers when I could play them on my original gameboy. Is there really THAT much difference? (I suppose that did link a bit with the topic.)
But since I'm here I may as well voice my opinion (however off topic it may be).
I don't see how people can play handheld consoles if they have a proper console at home. I just can't go from playing Tony Hawks on the Dreamcast to playing Tony Hawks on the GBA. It's impossible. There's such a huge difference in the quality and fun factor of the games that I can't go from one to the other. 2D platformers are okay because they're different and still very playable as graphics-wise, they're not too ambitious. It's when you get 3D attempts like F-Zero or Mario Kart that cause serious problems gameplay wise. I'm so used to their N64 incarnations that I find them totally unplayable on the GBA. Still, I wouldn't pay 60 quid for those GBA Mario type platformers when I could play them on my original gameboy. Is there really THAT much difference? (I suppose that did link a bit with the topic.)
I understand about the smaller CDs issue, I've always thought it would be great for a portable hand held which used tiny CDs. There is one major problem though - the reason the GameBoy has stuck with cartridges is because they're meant to be portable. Using CDs would require you to take the actual CD case with you, or invest in a CD wallet.
Me and my mate reckon that CDs are the way forward for portable gaming, and if costs can be lowered to £10-20 it would be so much better. I hate paying £35 for a GameBoy Advance game which has an older brother on the GameCube for only £40.
But I don't want to get into the ludicrous gaming price shenanigan - handhelds will follow suit onto CDs when gaming turns 3D. It happened to TV consoles, because of the need for massive data storage, and I'm certain it'll happen to handhelds.
Me and my mate reckon that CDs are the way forward for portable gaming, and if costs can be lowered to £10-20 it would be so much better. I hate paying £35 for a GameBoy Advance game which has an older brother on the GameCube for only £40.
But I don't want to get into the ludicrous gaming price shenanigan - handhelds will follow suit onto CDs when gaming turns 3D. It happened to TV consoles, because of the need for massive data storage, and I'm certain it'll happen to handhelds.
I know exactly what you mean. I got a Gameboy colour a while ago and then the advance was released a few months after.
I think the GameGear from Sega was by far the better of the two handhelds originally - I mean it had a colour screen to start with, years before Nintendo had the brains to copy.
Also the games cost too much - 30 quid for a handheld game!? You've got to be joking. What I say is put the games on discs to keep the price down. We've seen how small the GameCube discs are and they can store a lot of data. You could fit a GameCube disc into a GBA easily (if there was a slot).
There are games for the GBA that I want (such as Golden Sun) but I'm not going to fork out for the console and game only to find out that it's redundant in three weeks.
So in short, I agree with you.
I think the GameGear from Sega was by far the better of the two handhelds originally - I mean it had a colour screen to start with, years before Nintendo had the brains to copy.
Also the games cost too much - 30 quid for a handheld game!? You've got to be joking. What I say is put the games on discs to keep the price down. We've seen how small the GameCube discs are and they can store a lot of data. You could fit a GameCube disc into a GBA easily (if there was a slot).
There are games for the GBA that I want (such as Golden Sun) but I'm not going to fork out for the console and game only to find out that it's redundant in three weeks.
So in short, I agree with you.
Handheld gaming has always been popular. To the kids who know nothing about hooking up a console to a TV, the GameBoy has always been saviour. It's the video game system which has had the most games released for it - over 10,000 since release in 1989, and has been home to so many classic's you couldn't count. From Pokemon battling to nicking cars, the GameBoy has always been the console I could turn to for quick fun or retro action.
And I've always loved my GameBoy, my GameBoy Pocket, my GameBoy Colour and GameBoy Advance. Notice the problem arising? GameBoy has always been an ever-changing console. From the start, it was available in more than one colour and ever since then it's grown, changed and morphed. I'm not one to complain, for so long have I played the GameBoy, but compatibility issues are starting to get annoying.
Because... the GameBoy has never had serious competition. The NeoGeo Pocket failed, the Wonderswan Colour hasn't made it outside of Japan and all Sega's efforts have gone down the pan. And still, the GameBoy Advance is selling like hot cakes. The problem I have is that Nintendo will never sit still. The GameBoy Advance has been out here for little more than a year, and already there's talk of a newer version. I don't want to sound ungrateful Nintendo, but I don't want anything new.
If only the GameBoy Advance would have some stiff competition, be it by Sony or Microsoft. A battle of the miniature consoles. That would be very good, because it would be interesting to see just how things turn out. Undoubtedly a handheld with the word 'PlayStation' in the title would win, but the GameBoy has had such runaway success it's hard to tell. One thing's for sure - if the GameBoy wasn't the only serious contender on the market, Nintendo certainly wouldn't keep up with all this upgrading and remodelling crap. They'd have to get it perfect first time - battery life, backlit screen and sufficient technology to stay ahead of the pack for a few years at least. Then I'd be happy.
There's nothing wrong with a bit of competition. I love the GameBoy and all its incarnations, but I don't like having to buy a new one every couple of years. If only Nintendo could stop messing around, build everything into one small ergonomic console and leave it for five years - then I'd be happy(er). So what does everybody else think? Is the GameBoy fine as it is, on the brink of 2D and 3D gaming. Or does it need a technological kick in the pants to get proper 3D gaming, and let Nintendo stop updating the technology and start updating the games (I've had enough of SNES Mario conversions). I know what I'd rather have, and I'm pretty adamant that the same goes for you lot out there. Whatever the case - GameBoy rocks.
And I've always loved my GameBoy, my GameBoy Pocket, my GameBoy Colour and GameBoy Advance. Notice the problem arising? GameBoy has always been an ever-changing console. From the start, it was available in more than one colour and ever since then it's grown, changed and morphed. I'm not one to complain, for so long have I played the GameBoy, but compatibility issues are starting to get annoying.
Because... the GameBoy has never had serious competition. The NeoGeo Pocket failed, the Wonderswan Colour hasn't made it outside of Japan and all Sega's efforts have gone down the pan. And still, the GameBoy Advance is selling like hot cakes. The problem I have is that Nintendo will never sit still. The GameBoy Advance has been out here for little more than a year, and already there's talk of a newer version. I don't want to sound ungrateful Nintendo, but I don't want anything new.
If only the GameBoy Advance would have some stiff competition, be it by Sony or Microsoft. A battle of the miniature consoles. That would be very good, because it would be interesting to see just how things turn out. Undoubtedly a handheld with the word 'PlayStation' in the title would win, but the GameBoy has had such runaway success it's hard to tell. One thing's for sure - if the GameBoy wasn't the only serious contender on the market, Nintendo certainly wouldn't keep up with all this upgrading and remodelling crap. They'd have to get it perfect first time - battery life, backlit screen and sufficient technology to stay ahead of the pack for a few years at least. Then I'd be happy.
There's nothing wrong with a bit of competition. I love the GameBoy and all its incarnations, but I don't like having to buy a new one every couple of years. If only Nintendo could stop messing around, build everything into one small ergonomic console and leave it for five years - then I'd be happy(er). So what does everybody else think? Is the GameBoy fine as it is, on the brink of 2D and 3D gaming. Or does it need a technological kick in the pants to get proper 3D gaming, and let Nintendo stop updating the technology and start updating the games (I've had enough of SNES Mario conversions). I know what I'd rather have, and I'm pretty adamant that the same goes for you lot out there. Whatever the case - GameBoy rocks.