Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakex]

Why am I being picked on? I'm not even trying to bash the PSP here! All I came in to say was that there was a reason that the GBA was popular.

Yah and I can completely understand why people would be interested in the GBA. It does offer stuff that consoles don't. But the PSP can too and some people don't even seem to be willing to give it a chance (not saying you're one of them). It's automatically been written off as a port machine for PS2 games when I think Sony and the 3rd party developers know that won't work. While some appeal is to be able to play certain PS2 games in portable form, it's going to need it's own software to work.

I just don't really get this new wave of thought that since the PSP graphics and games can be done on consoles it's somehow useless, despite that being the case with every single handheld before the PSP. I actually hope the next Nintendo handheld is just a simple follow up to the GBA, nothing fancy, no extra functions like the DS just to see the reaction from people who're saying that the PSP isn't worth it because games can be done on consoles now.

 

[Dujour]

I dont' care, I own two GBAs and one GBA NESP and I agree with this guy.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

portable gaming was cool when WE were young. but thats part of the problem WE who had the original gameboy arent young anymore. Back then we could bring the GB to school, on trips while our parents drove...i cant bring my GBA to work. I cant play my GBA whle driving. If i'm at home, i'd rather play on my HDTV with 5.1 sound. the GBA isnt marketed at older gamers. nor will the DS be. Nintendo isnt re-releasing old games for US. they are releasing them for the newer generation as a history lesson.

Yeah, I agree with this almost completely. I guess it depends on your lifestyle. If you're working full-time, have a wife and kid, as well as doing things with friends and wife regularly, portable gaming isn't something that can be easily seen as an important thing. When I'm done with work, and not doing outside things, or with friends and not hanging with my wife and child, it's time to go on the PC or sit down on the couch and play consoles. While I have the GBA, I play it to finish the 2-3 games that I feel are worth picking up a year. However, when I really game, it is on home systems that I do enjoy it most.

As to the topic and its poster's angry tirade against the modern Nintendo and portable gaming, I agree with most of it on a certain level. Some of it is downright ridiculous, but some of it is completely fact for myself as well.

 

[Tellaerin]

Why am I being picked on? I'm not even trying to bash the PSP here! All I came in to say was that there was a reason that the GBA was popular.

Sorry, didn't mean to come off so harshly. I just recalled you making the same point in a couple of other threads. (I seem to remember you asking why companies would want to develop original titles for the PSP when they could just as easily produce them for a home console, and suggesting that gamers would pass on the system because it didn't offer anything aside from portability.) I wanted to point out that what the PSP promises to offer is pretty compelling to some people in its own right.

 

[Spiritreaver]

Yah and I can completely understand why people would be interested in the GBA. It does offer stuff that consoles don't. But the PSP can too and some people don't even seem to be willing to give it a chance (not saying you're one of them). It's automatically been written off as a port machine for PS2 games when I think Sony and the 3rd party developers know that won't work. While some appeal is to be able to play certain PS2 games in portable form, it's going to need it's own software to work.

I just don't really get this new wave of thought that since the PSP graphics and games can be done on consoles it's somehow useless, despite that being the case with every single handheld before the PSP. I actually hope the next Nintendo handheld is just a simple follow up to the GBA, nothing fancy, no extra functions like the DS just to see the reaction from people who're saying that the PSP isn't worth it because games can be done on consoles now.

I agree with you that argument about how PSP is useless only because it has PS2 quality titles which are recent is rather silly. The GB had NES quality titles during that era and it did well.

What I think thought is that the high end graphics and disc base system seems like a hinderance to the system in terms of battery life, price, durability, and reliability. Not the say the PSP will have those problems, but if it does it can cause serious issues with the system and how it is received by people. This is why I'm fine with Nintendo gradually updating the GBA until it's capable of producing better experiences without ruining the other major factors the previous editions gave. We've already seen plenty of systems fail because this, and I worry the PSP may end up going the same route. I hope not, it will give nice competition and will cause Nintendo to up the ante... but with out current knowledge I don't have much hope for it.

 

[Dan]

Sorry, didn't mean to come off so harshly. I just recalled you making the same point in a couple of other threads. (I seem to remember you asking why companies would want to develop original titles for the PSP when they could just as easily produce them for a home console, and suggesting that gamers would pass on the system because it didn't offer anything aside from portability.) I wanted to point out that what the PSP promises to offer is pretty compelling to some people in its own right.

Well, fair enough, although I don't think I ever suggested people would pass on the PSP, at least not in significant numbers. I remain unconvinced that there are any genres or kinds of games that are poorly represented or fail to sell on the PS2 (or any other console) and would do otherwise on the PSP. It's also true that I see no real creative incentive for PSP development, although I don't really see one with the GBA either.

I don't want to get into the whole discussion again, but... I just don't see the PSP as opening up any new doors in the industry, or even allowing for old doors to remain open, as the GBA functions in relation to 2D games. It's not my bag, but sure, others will scoop it up, no doubt about it. It's just that I would most definitely prefer to play the games that the PSP will get on a home console instead, and it seems perfectly possible for that to happen, both creatively and financially. For that matter, I'd say the same about my GBA games, although such games don't prove very viable in the console market. That's why I have a hard time embracing the PSP. At the very least the PSP is a port machine and at the most it stands alongside the PS2, Xbox and GC as another platform that plays the same kinds of games. I can't say I'm for the further subdividing of exclusive games to a larger number of platforms.

That's about it... hopefully that's not too controversial.

 

[Neutron Night]

Some of you are confusing "graphics" with "technology". Graphics are just superficial, but technology involves every aspect of game creation and what can be done. Quite simply, the GBA doesn't do anything that wasn't done - and I mean DONE, stick a fork in it - in the early 90's.

Compared to the SNES, it has:

- 2 fewer buttons

- A messed-up screen ratio

- Lower resolution

- Inferior sound quality

The SNES was released in Japan in 1990.

Who says progress strides boldly forward into the future? Not Nintendo!

To the people who say Nintendo is out to make money, how did you come to this amazing conclusion? Strangely, there seem to be plenty of for-profit gaming companies out there who choose to offer the consumer a good deal. A megabudget title like Final Fantasy has the same MSRP as some POS like Billy Joe Bob's Monster Truck Racing Xtreme. While Nintendo decides to charge full price for games so ancient, entire layers of geological stratum were laid down since they were last released. And people pay it, so Nintendo keeps giving it to them.

As for GBA being the only place for 2D games, you can't credit GBA for that. Just because mainstream idiots would refuse to buy a spectacular 2D game on a console isn't the console's fault. That's a problem with the industry in general, and a completely seperate issue. Maybe I'll tackle that one some other time.

 

[cvxfreak]

Some of you are confusing "graphics" with "technology". Graphics are just superficial, but technology involves every aspect of game creation and what can be done. Quite simply, the GBA doesn't do anything that wasn't done - and I mean DONE, stick a fork in it - in the early 90's.

Do the Tony Hawk games count? I thought those were kinda amazing for the GBA.

As for GBA being the only place for 2D games, you can't credit GBA for that. Just because mainstream idiots would refuse to buy a spectacular 2D game on a console isn't the console's fault. That's a problem with the industry in general, and a completely seperate issue. Maybe I'll tackle that one some other time.

I'll credit the GBA because they sell so damn well on it, got that?

 

[Grubdog]

Compared to the SNES, it has:

- 2 fewer buttons

- A messed-up screen ratio

- Lower resolution

- Inferior sound quality

The SNES was released in Japan in 1990

- It's ten times smaller

- It's cheaper

- It's PORTABLE

Was there a portable SNES in the early 90s?

 

[Spiritreaver]

To the people who say Nintendo is out to make money, how did you come to this amazing conclusion? Strangely, there seem to be plenty of for-profit gaming companies out there who choose to offer the consumer a good deal. A megabudget title like Final Fantasy has the same MSRP as some POS like Billy Joe Bob's Monster Truck Racing Xtreme. While Nintendo decides to charge full price for games so ancient, entire layers of geological stratum were laid down since they were last released. And people pay it, so Nintendo keeps giving it to them.

Because Nintendo's games can sell like that. Not many people would pay for a game with only Space Invaders, Pong, any of Midway's classics, or Atari's and so on. A compilation for them would gain them more money than seperate games. Nintendo on the other hand is well known by people all over the world, and I'm sure more people know that name than Midway, Konami, Namco, etc. The same goes for characters like Mario and Zelda. People will buy Nintendo's popular franchise games regardless of what they are. So Nintendo's going to take advantage of that.

As for GBA being the only place for 2D games, you can't credit GBA for that. Just because mainstream idiots would refuse to buy a spectacular 2D game on a console isn't the console's fault. That's a problem with the industry in general, and a completely seperate issue. Maybe I'll tackle that one some other time.

But they will buy them on the GBA, so where are the 2D titles going to go?

 

[callous]

In response to the topic starter, a quote from The Rainmaker immediately came to mind:

You must be stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I don't want to get into the whole discussion again, but... I just don't see the PSP as opening up any new doors in the industry, or even allowing for old doors to remain open, as the GBA functions in relation to 2D games.

Opening up the handheld industry to proper 3D isn't opening any doors? I'd say it's a pretty significant step forward for the handheld industry. Alot of people might be bitter about it because it's pretty much going to put an end to the amount of 2D games we see now, and I guess that's has alot to do with some of the backlash the PSP is getting.

 

[Dan]

Opening up the handheld industry to proper 3D isn't opening any doors? I'd say it's a pretty significant step forward for the handheld industry.

I mean creative doors when it comes to gameplay and whatnot. I really don't care whether a 3D platformer is played on a television or a portable, it's still a 3D platformer. Step forward for the handheld industry? Sure. Step forward for creativity and expanding the horizons of actual gameplay? Not really.

 

[cvxfreak]

I mean creative doors when it comes to gameplay and whatnot. I really don't care whether a 3D platformer is played on a television or a portable, it's still a 3D platformer. Step forward for the handheld industry? Sure. Step forward for creativity and expanding the horizons of actual gameplay? Not really.

IAWTP

 

[Spiritreaver]

Opening up the handheld industry to proper 3D isn't opening any doors? I'd say it's a pretty significant step forward for the handheld industry. Alot of people might be bitter about it because it's pretty much going to put an end to the amount of 2D games we see now, and I guess that's has alot to do with some of the backlash the PSP is getting.

Not when it will drastically lower the battery life of current handhelds, or possibly raise the price by nearly a $100 or more, or risking serious problems with moving parts for gaming and "portability". We've heard such before from previous handhelds.

Also, you mentioned something earlier about how a lot of people want current gen quality game son a handheld. But I don't see this to be the case when the GBA is rivalling the PS2 in sales. I think more people would have been put off on buying it if they all believed that. Or they wold have taken the Lynx over the GB, or the Game Gear.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I mean creative doors when it comes to gameplay and whatnot. I really don't care whether a 3D platformer is played on a television or a portable, it's still a 3D platformer. Step forward for the handheld industry? Sure. Step forward for creativity and expanding the horizons of actual gameplay? Not really.

But to have less bounds when it comes to what you're capable of creating in a game is important. Let's face this already. I believe that the vast majority of the (gaming, not just handheld) market accepts and pretty much expects good 3D as a given. Sony, may tap into a part of the market that will want a modern 3D portable and still service those that want the traditional older-style 2D fare. That's a problem for Nintendo. Fortunately for Nintendo, they own the market and, arguably, their greatest concentration of quality software is on the GBA.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Also, you mentioned something earlier about how a lot of people want current gen quality game son a handheld. But I don't see this to be the case when the GBA is rivalling the PS2 in sales. I think more people would have been put off on buying it if they all believed that. O

The GBA's systems sell as well as the PS2 does, the actual games sell incredibly bad to the point that the GBA has the lowest tie in rate of any of the competing systems today. GBA games sell pretty badly with a few exceptions. The only million seller in Japan for the GBA are the Pokemon games released for it, although there around 8 in the US that are million sellers.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

The worldwide GBA sales rival the worldwide PS2's sales, in large part, because Nintendo OWNS the market. There hasn't been serious head-to-head competition on the handheld front since the Game Gear.

 

[cvxfreak]

Speaking of the devil

http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html

 

[cvxfreak]

The GBA's systems sell as well as the PS2 does, the actual games sell incredibly bad to the point that the GBA has the lowest tie in rate of any of the competing systems today. GBA games sell pretty badly with a few exceptions. The only million seller in Japan for the GBA are the Pokemon games released for it, although there around 8 in the US that are million sellers.

I'd bet good money that Super Mario Advance, Super Mario Advance 2, Mario Kart Advance and eventually RockMan EXE 4 will break a million in Japan if the Mario games haven't done so already. Nintendo games tend to just keep selling to some person on this planet, U.S. and Japan.

 

[Nintendo Ate My Children]

Maybe I'll tackle that one some other time.

Oh, please do. These boards haven't had comedy like this since opa couldn't get under the pipe in Metal Gear Solid.

 

[Spiritreaver]

The worldwide GBA sales rival the worldwide PS2's sales, in large part, because Nintendo OWNS the market. There hasn't been serious head-to-head competition on the handheld front since the Game Gear.

Yes, but I was talking about how people wanted current gen graphics. If this were the case they would have taken the Lynx over the GB and the Game Gear, and so on. But of course there were other factors at play which is why I find those far more important than graphics tot he consumer market.

Solidsnakex: There are quite a few top selling franchies on the GBA, so I don't exactly see your point except that you took out those titles. If you did that with every other system it would be the same. I've also kept a slight watch over Japan sales every month and GBA games are usually found somewhere in the top 10 spots. So saying they just don't what you mean by how they don't sell.

 

[Dan]

But to have less bounds when it comes to what you're capable of creating in a game is important.

Umm, how does the PSP create fewer "bounds"?

Sony, may tap into a part of the market that will want a modern 3D portable and still service those that want the traditional older-style 2D fare.

Until there's evidence of such game development on the PSP, I'll have to go with "may not".

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Umm, how does the PSP create fewer "bounds"?

Instead of creating that cool 3D portable game, the developer may not create that game on handheld at all because of the limitations of the hardware. This is a very important asset that the PSP can wield if it's poised right with the right price and software to back it up. It would bring the existing (mainly PS2) development community an attractive option of creating software for the system without having to change their development costs drastically. Of course, it opens up the door for lots of ports...but then, that never stopped Nintendo from doing the exact same thing.

In fact, outside of there being some different specs and built-in capabilities, I'd say that the PSP is extremely similar to that of the original GB. The original GB was, for the most part a sort-of superior (true stereo sound), sort-of not superior (no color and lower res) portable NES. It was a great way to create double the software available to the consumer and take advantage of making certain they were essentially media-segregated to ensure more sales. Nintendo and others made mad money off of quick conversions of already-existing NES titles with little to no content difference. Sony will do the same, but will have to create more differing software content in the modern GBA age. Development is probably very, very similar and would not incur much of the research and development costs usually associated with learning a new platform.

Until there's evidence of such game development on the PSP, I'll have to go with "may not".

Well, the system's not out until next year and details are scarce for now. I'm certain that it will have enough software of the old-school variety to bridge that gap for many.

 

[sarusama]

Instead of turning the black-and-white television into a color television and then an HDTV, they would instead "change the paradigm" and create a FELLevision, where you FEEL the image instead of seeing it. So what if no one asked for it?

Maybe I'm missunderstanding something... but in what way would that be a bad thing? Instead of conveying experiences through the indirection of images, you do so directly!! No need to spend gazillions on special effects to relate the dramatic nature of the action, people would just be able to *gasp* feel it.

Anyway, I just had to pick that point out, because I'm getting tired of people jumping on Nintendo for doing something different and/or not supporting some kinds of games/media. On the latter point, people tend to forget the Nintendo is primarily a software house: I don't see people bitching about Square Enix only producing RPGs. Just in the same way Nintendo produces "family" games. That's what they do. It's like bitching to Disney about not producing more "Kill Bill"-style animation.

Great things can be done using Connectivity. But are any developers trying to do anything with it? No! First Nintendo has to prove that it works, and until they do so, let's bitch about how STUPID the idea was in the first place. Fuck them for proposing a different interface idea: we should stick to controllers and they must have 4 faces buttons in exactly the Dual-Shock layout and...

I'm just amazed at the level of mindless bitching. You can only say that something isn't the greatest thing, until you've experienced something better. How do you know that a Feelvision would not be better than the same in a more enhanced fashion (HDTV).

 

[Neutron Night]

Speaking of the devil

http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html

My God, look at all the people who have voted "More than one". People have completely fucking lost it. This is the end of civilization as we know it.

Oh, please do. These boards haven't had comedy like this since opa couldn't get under the pipe in Metal Gear Solid.

That's it, now you've provoked me. My next post will concern the Neo-Effervesence of Transindental Logic, as modified by PseudoHalycronic Reality. Because I'm just that intelligent.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Solidsnakex: There are quite a few top selling franchies on the GBA, so I don't exactly see your point except that you took out those titles. If you did that with every other system it would be the same. I've also kept a slight watch over Japan sales every month and GBA games are usually found somewhere in the top 10 spots. So saying they just don't what you mean by how they don't sell.

Yah there are some. But you were saying that since the GBA sells so well compared to the PS2 that it shows there isn't a huge demand for PS2 quality graphics in handheld gaming. But if you compare the actual game sales of the GBA to the PS2 the PS2 wins by quite a large margin despite both systems having around the same size userbase. So if you want to go by the comparison you were originally making that it shows there's a demand there because the actual GBA games aren't selling on the same level as the hardware.

This is one thing i've pointed out before that could be a significant advantage for the PSP if Sony is able to convince and show developers that the average PSP game will sell better than your average GBA/DS game.

 

[cvxfreak]

My God, look at all the people who have voted "More than one". People have completely fucking lost it. This is the end of civilization as we know it.

Maybe it's just you.

 

[AniHawk]

People have completely fucking lost it.

You sure have.

 

[GDGF]

Nice antithesis you got going on here. I disagree wholeheartedly, of course

 

[Spiritreaver]

Yah there are some. But you were saying that since the GBA sells so well compared to the PS2 that it shows there isn't a huge demand for PS2 quality graphics in handheld gaming. But if you compare the actual game sales of the GBA to the PS2 the PS2 wins by quite a large margin despite both systems having around the same size userbase. So if you want to go by the comparison you were originally making that it shows there's a demand there because the actual GBA games aren't selling on the same level as the hardware.

This is one thing i've pointed out before that could be a significant advantage for the PSP if Sony is able to convince and show developers that the average PSP game will sell better than your average GBA/DS game.

They certainly don't sell poorly, so I still don't see what you're getting at. A lot of GBA games seem to sell equal to or more than the average PS2 game. They both have they're top selling franchises and it's software sales for many games can rival the GC and Xbox especially in areas like Japan. Why is that the case? I just don't see an exact correlation between 3D = more sales! I would also like to know how much GBA to console games sell for. They don't seem to do as well for some reason when a console version/spin-off is made.

And I still wonder how well they will sell next to games of equal and better quality on the normal PS2. What leads you to think that the PSP games will sell as well as console games?

 

[Dan]

Instead of creating that cool 3D portable game, the developer may not create that game on handheld at all because of the limitations of the hardware. This is a very important asset that the PSP can wield if it's poised right with the right price and software to back it up. It would bring the existing (mainly PS2) development community an attractive option of creating software for the system without having to change their development costs drastically. Of course, it opens up the door for lots of ports...but then, that never stopped Nintendo from doing the exact same thing.

In fact, outside of there being some different specs and built-in capabilities, I'd say that the PSP is extremely similar to that of the original GB. The original GB was, for the most part a sort-of superior (true stereo sound), sort-of not superior (no color and lower res) portable NES. It was a great way to create double the software available to the consumer and take advantage of making certain they were essentially media-segregated to ensure more sales. Nintendo and others made mad money off of quick conversions of already-existing NES titles with little to no content difference. Sony will do the same, but will have to create more differing software content in the modern GBA age. Development is probably very, very similar and would not incur much of the research and development costs usually associated with learning a new platform.

In case you didn't read what I wrote, I'll add it again here: I mean creative doors when it comes to gameplay and whatnot. I really don't care whether a 3D platformer is played on a television or a portable, it's still a 3D platformer. Step forward for the handheld industry? Sure. Step forward for creativity and expanding the horizons of actual gameplay? Not really.

So again, how does the PSP create fewer "bounds" in terms of creativity? The simple answer is that it doesn't. I don't give a rat's ass about what R&D costs or whether PS2 developers can easy work on the PSP or about a publisher's profit margins being beefed up.

 

[AniHawk]

Yah there are some. But you were saying that since the GBA sells so well compared to the PS2 that it shows there isn't a huge demand for PS2 quality graphics in handheld gaming. But if you compare the actual game sales of the GBA to the PS2 the PS2 wins by quite a large margin despite both systems having around the same size userbase. So if you want to go by the comparison you were originally making that it shows there's a demand there because the actual GBA games aren't selling on the same level as the hardware.

This is one thing i've pointed out before that could be a significant advantage for the PSP if Sony is able to convince and show developers that the average PSP game will sell better than your average GBA/DS game.

Well the difference is that people don't use handhelds as much as they do consoles. There's a lot of pick up and play games for the system, and some which just take a long time to complete. People don't sit down for hours on end to play their Game Boys, that's what home consoles are for. Game Boys are for playing games when you go places.

If Sony can convince developers that the PSP game will sell better, I won't be surprised. With a low battery life and high price tag, the people who do adopt early will be the ones to "justify" their purchase by buying the new games which come out for it. (these will be the hardcore fans. Some casuals, but mostly hardcore).

 

[GDGF]

One could make the point that the best selling games of this generation (and last) are on the GBA, if one were so inclined. I'm speaking of Pokemon, of course

 

[Spiritreaver]

My God, look at all the people who have voted "More than one". People have completely fucking lost it. This is the end of civilization as we know it.

Does it make you feel any better that I have 2 GBA SPs, 2 GBAs (One is an import), and 30 GBA games all of which I paid at full price but MMBN, MMBN2, and my two import games SMA and Wai Wai Racing. I'm also interested in buy a NES SP and maybe importing a Famicom or Rockman EXE SP. Plus there are a ton of games I plan on buying.

And I'm sure Dan has an even more impressive collection of games.

EDIT: Oh and I forgot. YOUR AVATAR IS TOO TALL NEUTRON NIGHT. I'm so anal about these things, I don't know why. I'm such a weirdo.

 

[Ranger X]

Wow can you explain to me why this thread isn't locked already?

Great entertainment anyhow. Thanks and keep posting ***take another pop-corn






*** and pops a beer too.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

In case you didn't read what I wrote, I'll add it again here: I mean creative doors when it comes to gameplay and whatnot. I really don't care whether a 3D platformer is played on a television or a portable, it's still a 3D platformer. Step forward for the handheld industry? Sure. Step forward for creativity and expanding the horizons of actual gameplay? Not really.

So again, how does the PSP create fewer "bounds" in terms of creativity? The simple answer is that it doesn't. I don't give a rat's ass about what R&D costs or whether PS2 developers can easy work on the PSP or about a publisher's profit margins being beefed up.

Well, your imagination is certainly limited, IMO. Options for creativity in games are opened up a bit with the advent of more capable hardware. That's the reason we got the new GBA and didn't just stay with the old GBC. It's about options. Whether or not game developers take advantage of that is up in the air. Certainly, there are enough 3D-based games on the GBA that sell decently enough...though they are very limited, thanks to the hardware. How about more creative track design in an F-Zero or Mario Kart game that isn't just limited to a simple Mode-7 plane. How about good FP games on a portable? How about more advanced and creative fighting games on a portable? The list can go on and on...

How about using that wireless multi-player capability to allow for amazing 3D co-op adventures in a glorious 3D world? How about the chance to play a decent 3D flight game on handheld? Or more. The developers, if so inclined, will have the option of doing more on a more capable system.

 

[Dan]

And I'm sure Dan has an even more impressive collection of games.

I currently own a GBA, GBA SP, 40-45 GBA titles, 23 GBC titles and 9 GB ones. I've owned about 25-30 other GBA games before, but I've since sold those.

 

[SolidSnakex]

They certainly don't sell poorly, so I still don't see what you're getting at. A lot of GBA games seem to sell equal to or more than the average PS2 game. They both have they're top selling franchises and it's software sales for many games can rival the GC and Xbox especially in areas like Japan. Why is that the case? I just don't see an exact correlation between 3D = more sales! I would also like to know how much GBA to console games sell for. They don't seem to do as well for some reason when a console version/spin-off is made.

And I still wonder how well they will sell next to games of equal and better quality on the normal PS2. What leads you to think that the PSP games will sell as well as console games?

I'm not saying GBA games sell terribly or anything, i'm saying they don't sell on par with PS2 games despite similar fanbases. You pointed out earlier that the GBA rivals the PS2 in sales, but its really only in actual system sales not software.

http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2003b.shtml

The PS2 sold around 10 million more software units last year in Japan than the GBA did.

Also if you want a game comparison will the Super Robot Taisen games do?

The 2nd Super Robot Taisen Alpha PS2 - 511,517
Super Robot Taisen D GBA - 199,607

Super Robot Taisen Impact PS2 - 632,536
Super Robot Taisen R GBA - 285,314

I don't really know if PSP games will sell as well as their console counterparts but we won't know for sure till it's released. I don't see any real reason to say they won't as 3D games are simply much more popular with the general public than 2D games are.

 

[Spiritreaver]

I currently own a GBA, GBA SP, 40-45 GBA titles, 23 GBC titles and 9 GB ones. I've owned about 25-30 other GBA games before, but I've since sold those.

See? What did I tell ya. I'm not sure how many GB/C games I own myself, never bothred to count, not as many as GBA I don't think though. The SP (GBA too) is the only handheld to really mesmorize me in terms of a system. Not even the DS/PSP get me as hyped as I was when I saw the GBA for the first time. I don't lnow why, but I'm just head over heels about the GBA.

Oh, and I wonder why I never bothered to apply at GBAC, I don't think I felt comfortable there after getting banned for that spat we all had. But eh, in the past.

 

[Dan]

Well, your imagination is certainly limited, IMO. Options for creativity in games are opened up a bit with the advent of more capable hardware. That's the reason we got the new GBA and didn't just stay with the old GBC. It's about options. Whether or not game developers take advantage of that is up in the air. Certainly, there are enough 3D-based games on the GBA that sell decently enough...though they are very limited, thanks to the hardware. How about more creative track design in an F-Zero or Mario Kart game that isn't just limited to a simple Mode-7 plane. How about good FP games on a portable? How about more advanced and creative fighting games on a portable? The list can go on and on...

Can. You. Read?

I don't care whether a game is played on a television or a handheld screen. It makes no difference when it comes to actual gameplay. Tell me what the PSP brings to the creative end of gaming that past consoles have not. Tell me.

 

[AniHawk]

I'm not saying GBA games sell terribly or anything, i'm saying they don't sell on par with PS2 games despite similar fanbases. You pointed out earlier that the GBA rivals the PS2 in sales, but its really only in actual system sales not software.

http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2003b.shtml

The PS2 sold around 10 million more software units last year in Japan than the GBA did.

Also if you want a game comparison will the Super Robot Taisen games do?

The 2nd Super Robot Taisen Alpha PS2 - 511,517
Super Robot Taisen D GBA - 199,607

Super Robot Taisen Impact PS2 - 632,536
Super Robot Taisen R GBA - 285,314

I don't really know if PSP games will sell as well as their console counterparts but we won't know for sure till it's released. I don't see any real reason to say they won't as 3D games are simply much more popular with the general public than 2D games are.

Then you run into the teeny tiny problem with userbase. By the time the PSP launches, there'd be 85 million PS2s, and 0 PSPs. I really doubt they'll sell as well as their console counterparts at all.

 

[Dan]

Oh, and I wonder why I never bothered to apply at GBAC, I don't think I felt comfortable there after getting banned for that spat we all had. But eh, in the past.

Heh... an embarassing little spat at that...

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Can. You. Read?

I don't care whether a game is played on a television or a handheld screen. It makes no difference when it comes to actual gameplay. Tell me what the PSP brings to the creative end of gaming that past consoles have not. Tell me.

Oh well. Too tired to have decent reading comprehension in my favor tonight.

 

[AniHawk]

Heh... an embarassing little spat at that...

Was it when the GBA SP came out?

 

[cvxfreak]

I'm not saying GBA games sell terribly or anything, i'm saying they don't sell on par with PS2 games despite similar fanbases. You pointed out earlier that the GBA rivals the PS2 in sales, but its really only in actual system sales not software.

http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2003b.shtml

The PS2 sold around 10 million more software units last year in Japan than the GBA did.

Also if you want a game comparison will the Super Robot Taisen games do?

The 2nd Super Robot Taisen Alpha PS2 - 511,517
Super Robot Taisen D GBA - 199,607

Super Robot Taisen Impact PS2 - 632,536
Super Robot Taisen R GBA - 285,314

I don't really know if PSP games will sell as well as their console counterparts but we won't know for sure till it's released. I don't see any real reason to say they won't as 3D games are simply much more popular with the general public than 2D games are.

I think its because the GBA is owned by younger people who can't buy as many games. The Robot Wars games on GBA are pretty mediocre too. Plus GBA games can be expensive relative to the costs of the system in Japan. And the fact many of the games are ports.

 

[Dan]

Was it when the GBA SP came out?

No idea, why? I don't recall anything concerned with the SP at the time, but I have no idea.

 

[Spiritreaver]

Was it when the GBA SP came out?

Oh no, long before that. It was silly, I posted new screenshots on the forums and they didn't like t hat I did not comment on them and it felt like a waste of a topic I guess. I can't remember to well. I got rather offended for one reason or another and turned into a larger ordeal than it was. I did that a lot back then. I'm not sure why really.

 

[AniHawk]

No idea, why? I don't recall anything concerned with the SP at the time, but I have no idea.

Oh. I figured on a GBA board, that there'd be an argument over when SP came out, and everyone felt like Nintendo was ripping everyone off (which they did), like all other gaming boards across the internet.

 

[Alcibiades]

I skimmed the first post and a in disbelief and in utter disappointment with fellow GAFFERS that this "rant" would reach 4 pages... (unless there's some running joke I missed by not going to pg. 2 & 3)...

I'll pass...