PSP out in August??

[OB1]

According to Gaming-Age:

Following the PSP showing at the recent GDC, Sony has announced that the PSP's release is being pushed up. PSP will now launch in Japan around late July, with a North American and European launch occuring in early August.
This news, however shocking, is not unexpected. The PSP was first shown to the public last week during the Game Developer's Conference. Apperantly, the showing was so impressive that several publishers jumped on the PSP bandwagon immediately.

According to our sources, the PSP is similar to the PS2 in terms of programming, so expect a good number of PS2 titles to be either moved or ported to the PSP around launch. It is said that users will be able to download their PS2 saved game to the PSP for use in the PSP version of the title, and vice versa.

Due to this overwhelming support, Sony has decided that it can successfully launch the PSP in August with a set of quality launch titles.

Death Jr., a platformer in the veign of Crash Bandicoot, will be Sony's big launch title. Additionally, EA Sports has confirmed to be packaging a PSP version of Madden 2005 with the PS2 version in a promotional effort. Users will be able to download their PS2 saved game to the PSP for use in the PSP version of the title, and vice versa. Rockstar is likely planning a Grand Theft Auto title, but when asked, a company representative suggestively replied, "wait for E3." There are reports of Koei developing a new Dynasty Warriors game for the portable, as well, though Koei representives had not returned our calls as of press time.

Stay tuned for the latest information on the PSP's impending release. Expect more specific details at next month's E3.




-- Paul Bryant

Bad news for Nintendo if it's true.

[The Former DMiller]

Gaming Age is catching on to an April Fool's joke a day too late. Bad research by them if you ask me.

[OB1]

That's a pretty lame April Fool's joke if that's the case.

[The Former DMiller]

My bad, actually. Gaming Age started the joke so it was you catching on to it too late, not them. :) It was confirmed to be a joke in their forums. Did you really think Sony would move up the release date of the PSP this soon after announcing a delay?

[Dark Jaguar]

Yeah, it is a pretty lame joke, but it's one someone could actually fall for.

[OB1]

Well it sounded pretty convincing. I mean if they got lots of ports for launch then they wouldn't have to wait so long for enough original content.

[Weltall]

YA DUMMY

[A Black Falcon]

It does sound convincing... lucky it's a joke. :)

[alien space marine]

:poop:

[Dark Lord Neo]

I didn't relize that it was capable of running ports of PS2 titles

[OB1]

That's what they say...

[A Black Falcon]

Yes, and if you buy the special version it'll include both versions in one box so you can play it both at home and on the road! Oh joy!

[Great Rumbler]

Woo!

[A Black Falcon]

I LIKE how GB games are different from the major-console titles, but 'the games are the same on PS2 and PSP' seems to be one of their big selling points...

[OB1]

Well GBA games are similar to major console games... just ones from over a decade ago.

[Great Rumbler]

Games from a decade ago were cool though.

[A Black Falcon]

Similar? Yeah, but not the same mostly. Oh sure there are ports, but there are many good original titles too... and yes, games from a decade ago were good. :)

And remember a decade ago there were portables closer to the power of the major consoles but then too they weren't just straight ports... never have been. The PSP seems to be trying to come close to that and I don't really like the idea that much... if I wanted the game I'd just get the major console version probably! Most people wouldn't get another copy of a game they own just for portability...

[OB1]

Similar? Yeah, but not the same mostly. Oh sure there are ports, but there are many good original titles too... and yes, games from a decade ago were good.

I'm not talking about ports or original titles, I'm talking about how they could pass for SNES games. You said that the PSP will basically be a portable PS2, as if that were a bad thing. The GBA is like a portable SNES. See where I'm going with this?

And remember a decade ago there were portables closer to the power of the major consoles but then too they weren't just straight ports... never have been. The PSP seems to be trying to come close to that and I don't really like the idea that much... if I wanted the game I'd just get the major console version probably! Most people wouldn't get another copy of a game they own just for portability...

Yeah, the Gameboy was totally just as powerful as the SNES.
So... what you're saying is that it's bad that the PSP is so powerful and that Sony should have made it as powerful as say, the PSX in order not to have games looking as good as ones on their current home console? Forgive me for not understanding your inane logic. If all of the games end up being PS2 ports then that would be bad, but that's not what is going to happen. Sure there will be plenty of PS2 ports just like there are tons of SNES ports on the GBA, but there will also be plenty of original content, and the ratio of ports to original content will increase after the PS3 comes out.

Now if you were to say something like "Handheld games should be 2D, and not just SNES-quality 2D like the GBA but more like Baten Kaitos 2D" then I'd agree with you. But calling a handheld too powerful because you've run out of real reasons to complain about it is just plain stupid.

[Dark Jaguar]

I think he meant the NES compaired to the GB. He just hadn't added up the difference between "then" and "now" in a while. Common mistake. People don't realize how much time has passed so they say "a decade ago" even though it's actually like a decade and a half ago that the GB and NES were out at once.

[OB1]

The GBC was closer to the power of the NES, not the regular GB. But I know what you're saying.

[Dark Jaguar]

Yeah, the GBC had twice the processor speed of the GB, making it just a little more powerful than an NES. So long as you know what I mean though, no biggy.

[OB1]

The Gameboy wasn't powerful enough to get NES ports, but if it had been that poweful do you think ABF would be complaining about the PSP? I don't think so. Honestly, I'd rather have the choice of buying the PS2 or PSP version of a game today than buying the PS2 version now and buying the handheld version again in six years. ABF's stance that the PSP is too poweful is ridiculous.

[A Black Falcon]

I'm not talking about ports or original titles, I'm talking about how they could pass for SNES games. You said that the PSP will basically be a portable PS2, as if that were a bad thing. The GBA is like a portable SNES. See where I'm going with this

No, because the GBA is more powerful than the SNES. Yes it has ports but not exclusively and it's more than just a portable SNES.

Yeah, the Gameboy was totally just as powerful as the SNES.
So... what you're saying is that it's bad that the PSP is so powerful and that Sony should have made it as powerful as say, the PSX in order not to have games looking as good as ones on their current home console? Forgive me for not understanding your inane logic. If all of the games end up being PS2 ports then that would be bad, but that's not what is going to happen. Sure there will be plenty of PS2 ports just like there are tons of SNES ports on the GBA, but there will also be plenty of original content, and the ratio of ports to original content will increase after the PS3 comes out.

Now if you were to say something like "Handheld games should be 2D, and not just SNES-quality 2D like the GBA but more like Baten Kaitos 2D" then I'd agree with you. But calling a handheld too powerful because you've run out of real reasons to complain about it is just plain stupid.

Game Boy - 1989. SNES - 1991. :)

Okay it wasn't quite a portable NES, but it was very close. Almost identical except for the color... later titles like Mario 2, Wario Land, the Kirby games (not to mention Link's Awakening!) prove that... they may not be as long as NES titles but except for the color you can't see much of a difference. Yes, the GBC was closer to the power of the NES. But its biggest addition was the color, I'd say...

And I'm not saying that it's power is bad, but that their clear intention to use it for direct ports of major-console titles (seemingly as the main group of games) isn't that great... especially since they are CURRENT games. At least SNES ones are old and out of print!

Oh, on the subject of the Game Boy, I was playing some GBC games... and went back to the old question 'which are the best GBC games?'. Now my top 4 is obvious -- the two Oracles titles, Mario DX, and Bionic Commando. Ages is the best. But after that... I just don't know. At the moment I'm feeling like Bionic Commando (Elite Forces) should be second, but ... above Zelda? But Seasons isn't exactly the best Zelda game, despite how good it is...

Anyway, my real point was to mention something (again, I'm sure, but do I care? :) ). Bionic Commando: Elite Forces on a GBA. Oh, I've mentioned the brightness problem many times before (it only looks right under DIRECT, very bright light -- unlike any of my other GBC games. It's like the brightness setting was knocked down a few notches...), but I'd forgotten about the bugs... the crash bug, to be specific. Now tell me if it's just my copy, but when I play it in my GBA, the game will freeze when I try to start a stage (on the 'select item' screen) if I've done (at least) one of the overhead missions since the last time I finished a level. So you can't fight any overhead missions, because after you do and try to enter a level the game freezes... makes the game a bit hard. And you can't go to the secret levels at all... I thought it might be the cart, but I checked my GBC and it worked fine...

Oh, on that note, is it easy to replace the screen cover for the GBC? Mine is in amazingly bad shape, with a lot of scratches in the middle of the screen... it looks almost white in places...

[OB1]

No, because the GBA is more powerful than the SNES. Yes it has ports but not exclusively and it's more than just a portable SNES.

Not so much powerful that straight SNES ports look bad. Most of Nintendo's games are SNES ports, and the system is littered with them.

Game Boy - 1989. SNES - 1991.

Your point is...

Okay it wasn't quite a portable NES, but it was very close. Almost identical except for the color... later titles like Mario 2, Wario Land, the Kirby games (not to mention Link's Awakening!) prove that... they may not be as long as NES titles but except for the color you can't see much of a difference. Yes, the GBC was closer to the power of the NES. But its biggest addition was the color, I'd say...

Which made all of the difference in the world. We did not get NES ports on the Gameboy, we got them on the GBC.

And I'm not saying that it's power is bad, but that their clear intention to use it for direct ports of major-console titles (seemingly as the main group of games) isn't that great... especially since they are CURRENT games. At least SNES ones are old and out of print!

First of all, you do not know that. There will be as many PS2-to-PSP ports as there are SNES-to-GBA ports. And the fact that the PSP ports are of newer games is actually a good thing. I want to be able to choose between a PS2 and PSP version of a game and not have to buy the PSP version six years after I've bought the PS2 version. Your argument is a joke.

Oh, on the subject of the Game Boy, I was playing some GBC games... and went back to the old question 'which are the best GBC games?'. Now my top 4 is obvious -- the two Oracles titles, Mario DX, and Bionic Commando. Ages is the best. But after that... I just don't know. At the moment I'm feeling like Bionic Commando (Elite Forces) should be second, but ... above Zelda? But Seasons isn't exactly the best Zelda game, despite how good it is...

The top three goes like this: LA DX, Oracle of Ages, Oracle of Seasons.

Anyway, my real point was to mention something (again, I'm sure, but do I care? ). Bionic Commando: Elite Forces on a GBA. Oh, I've mentioned the brightness problem many times before (it only looks right under DIRECT, very bright light -- unlike any of my other GBC games. It's like the brightness setting was knocked down a few notches...), but I'd forgotten about the bugs... the crash bug, to be specific. Now tell me if it's just my copy, but when I play it in my GBA, the game will freeze when I try to start a stage (on the 'select item' screen) if I've done (at least) one of the overhead missions since the last time I finished a level. So you can't fight any overhead missions, because after you do and try to enter a level the game freezes... makes the game a bit hard. And you can't go to the secret levels at all... I thought it might be the cart, but I checked my GBC and it worked fine...

Oh, on that note, is it easy to replace the screen cover for the GBC? Mine is in amazingly bad shape, with a lot of scratches in the middle of the screen... it looks almost white in places...

HA! We ALL told you about the regular GBA's problem with darkening GBC games but you refused to listen to us and got a GBA instead of an SP. I told you you'd regret that decision. :shakeit:

I have no idea how to change the screen cover.

[A Black Falcon]

Your point is...

It was well before the SNES so direct comparisons aren't very fair.

HA! We ALL told you about the regular GBA's problem with darkening GBC games but you refused to listen to us and got a GBA instead of an SP. I told you you'd regret that decision.

I have no idea how to change the screen cover.

Yes, that is why 11 GBC games look EXACTLY THE SAME, one is a game that has color issues on the GBC too (Micro Machines 1 & 2 Twin Turbo... darn I'm so annoyed I lost MMV3 for GBC...), and THIS IS THE ONLY EXCEPTION! SO of COURSE that's the reason!

It even explains the crash bug too! Yup!

...

Seriously, you are stupid. That game has problems with the GBA. I wonder if it does it with the GBA-SP and the GB Player as well, but I can't exactly check those...

Ahh... this might explain it... is it glitched carts?

http://www.gamefaqs.com/portable/gbcolor...56316.html

But unlike that guy for me it works normally in my GBC. But how would that bug create the darkness problem that I only see in this game...

The top three goes like this: LA DX, Oracle of Ages, Oracle of Seasons.

LA-DX... does that count? I guess so... but I don't have it and haven't played it much so I didn't list it... but yes it'd be the best. Though whether it's better than the old version, I don't know. :)

But I really do like Bionic Commando Elite Forces that much...

Not so much powerful that straight SNES ports look bad. Most of Nintendo's games are SNES ports, and the system is littered with them.

True, but that doesn't change the fact that it IS more powerful than the SNES.

First of all, you do not know that. There will be as many PS2-to-PSP ports as there are SNES-to-GBA ports. And the fact that the PSP ports are of newer games is actually a good thing. I want to be able to choose between a PS2 and PSP version of a game and not have to buy the PSP version six years after I've bought the PS2 version. Your argument is a joke.

It really depends on how common this 'both versions in one package' thing becomes... but the point is, how many people buy two versions of the same game (if they are seperate)? I'd think having them be the same would cut into sales of one or the other's titles...

Which made all of the difference in the world. We did not get NES ports on the Gameboy, we got them on the GBC.

Because NES games in B&W would look silly. :)

[Dark Jaguar]

DX is better than the original, it's just whether it's better enough to warrent the price that's the issue.

Yes, it's hard to really consider it a TRUE GBC game. It's more of a GB game with GBC bonus modes. It's similar to how the Oracle games have stuff you need a GBA to access (namely the Advance shop), but I wouldn't count those as GBA games so much as GBC games with some GBA extras.

My top 3, if I don't count LADX are:

1. Oracle of Seasons
1. Oracle of Ages
3. Super Mario Bros. DX

(I had to tie the first two. I really can't make up my mind which one I favor more, though considering I've done the time travel/alternate world thing twice before in the Zelda series, I'm leaning towards Seasons with it's more original season switching, altering the SAME world.

[OB1]

It was well before the SNES so direct comparisons aren't very fair.

What are you talking about? What does this have to do with anything?

Yes, that is why 11 GBC games look EXACTLY THE SAME, one is a game that has color issues on the GBC too (Micro Machines 1 & 2 Twin Turbo... darn I'm so annoyed I lost MMV3 for GBC...), and THIS IS THE ONLY EXCEPTION! SO of COURSE that's the reason!

That is not the only exception, all GBC games look darker on the GBA screen, some worse than others. Dragon Warrior 3 is especially bad. We all told you about this, and you hate that we were right. HA. HA. HA.

It even explains the crash bug too! Yup!

I wasn't talking about the bug.

...

Seriously, you are stupid. That game has problems with the GBA. I wonder if it does it with the GBA-SP and the GB Player as well, but I can't exactly check those...

Ahh... this might explain it... is it glitched carts?

http://www.gamefaqs.com/portable/gb...iew/R56316.html <http://www.gamefaqs.com/portable/gbcolor/review/R56316.html>

But unlike that guy for me it works normally in my GBC. But how would that bug create the darkness problem that I only see in this game...

You're an idiot. Lots of GBC games look way too dark on the GBA screen because the GBA screen is darker than the GBC screen! Why do you think Nintendo started to use different screens later on in the GBA's lifespan?

LA-DX... does that count? I guess so... but I don't have it and haven't played it much so I didn't list it... but yes it'd be the best. Though whether it's better than the old version, I don't know.

But I really do like Bionic Commando Elite Forces that much...

Of course it counts. Zelda beats everything on the GBC.

True, but that doesn't change the fact that it IS more powerful than the SNES.

I brought up this fact because you complained about the PSP being too similar to the PS2. The GBA is also very similar to the SNES!

It really depends on how common this 'both versions in one package' thing becomes...

You can choose between one or the other. Simple.

but the point is, how many people buy two versions of the same game (if they are seperate)? I'd think having them be the same would cut into sales of one or the other's titles...

Haha, ever heard of a little series called "Pokemon"? People bought two versions of the same game on the same system!

Because NES games in B&W would look silly.

And a simple port would not be possible.

[Dark Jaguar]

Well, most people either got blue or red, not both. However, a lot who had one or the other also got yellow when it came out.

[A Black Falcon]

Of course it counts. Zelda beats everything on the GBC.

But I don't have it, so I haven't played it as much... $30 for a game I had already? Why?

That's why it wasn't there. Oh, the other game I heard mentioned the most was Metal Gear Solid, but I haven't played that one either...

What are you talking about? What does this have to do with anything?

You said the GB should be directly comparable (for ports, etc) to the SNES, which simply isn't true!

You're an idiot. Lots of GBC games look way too dark on the GBA screen because the GBA screen is darker than the GBC screen! Why do you think Nintendo started to use different screens later on in the GBA's lifespan?

Yes, a serious flaw when 1 game in 12 has the problem. Uh huh.

Oh, and should I also mention that I see no problems with any of my GBA games, including supposedly dim Gradius Galaxies?

I wasn't talking about the bug.

It's the bug that's the real problem... the dim colors are just an annoyance. It's not like it's unplayable or anything!

You can choose between one or the other. Simple.

WHICH IS MY POINT! If the games were different you may get both. So by a business standpoint I don't see how that is a good idea... well, except for the fact that it saves resources by not having to have as many people work on portable games... and they already skimp on them... I guess that's it then.

Oh, I would not exactly be surprised if a noticably higher proportion of PSP games were ports compared to GBA. Oh, GBA has many ports, but there are also many, many exclusives...

Haha, ever heard of a little series called "Pokemon"? People bought two versions of the same game on the same system!

And they were stupid. :) ... but those did have some differences (at least in their minds). Sony'll have to do things to differentiate the two versions if they sell them seperately...

And a simple port would not be possible.

But games that look just as good (or better than) NES games, but in B&W, are.

[OB1]

But I don't have it, so I haven't played it as much... $30 for a game I had already? Why?

Because it's in color.

You said the GB should be directly comparable (for ports, etc) to the SNES, which simply isn't true!

I said GBA, doofus. The Gameboy can't even handle NES ports.

Yes, a serious flaw when 1 game in 12 has the problem. Uh huh.

Oh, and should I also mention that I see no problems with any of my GBA games, including supposedly dim Gradius Galaxies?

*sigh*

You are so dumb. GBA games were made to compensate for the dark screen, so of course they look alright. All GBC games look darker on the GBA than they do on a GBC, however, some worse than others.

It's the bug that's the real problem... the dim colors are just an annoyance. It's not like it's unplayable or anything!

But it's still hard to look at.

WHICH IS MY POINT! If the games were different you may get both. So by a business standpoint I don't see how that is a good idea... well, except for the fact that it saves resources by not having to have as many people work on portable games... and they already skimp on them... I guess that's it then.

You make no sense whatsoever, unless your point is that you're stupid. Now you're complaining that you don't have to buy a similar game twice??! And you don't even know is that's true or not! Again, all you have is rumor and speculation!

:screwy:

Oh, I would not exactly be surprised if a noticably higher proportion of PSP games were ports compared to GBA. Oh, GBA has many ports, but there are also many, many exclusives...

Nintendo is the port/remake king, so I would be very surprised if Sony becomes as port-happy as Nintendo. I can see enhanced ports, but straight ports like Nintendo constantly does? I doubt we'll see tons of those.

And they were stupid. ... but those did have some differences (at least in their minds). Sony'll have to do things to differentiate the two versions if they sell them seperately...

You don't have to worry about Sony selling games for the PSP, games which you have absolutely zero concrete info on and are making big cases out of nothing but rumor. Sony has no problem selling software.

But games that look just as good (or better than) NES games, but in B&W, are.

The removal of color certainly makes them look worse.

[A Black Falcon]

Nintendo is the port/remake king, so I would be very surprised if Sony becomes as port-happy as Nintendo. I can see enhanced ports, but straight ports like Nintendo constantly does? I doubt we'll see tons of those.

I expect it (and always have). Sony wants money at least as much as Nintendo does... Though if what they say is any indication some (for new games) may be packaged in the same box.

Because it's in color.

That's not worth $30!

I said GBA, doofus. The Gameboy can't even handle NES ports.

I bet it could do B&W NES ports...

*sigh*

You are so dumb. GBA games were made to compensate for the dark screen, so of course they look alright. All GBC games look darker on the GBA than they do on a GBC, however, some worse than others.

True, most GBA games have adjusted to it. But why is it then that of my 12-13 GBC games I only notice anything in one (excepting that one that I have problems with in the GBC too...)? You don't have a good answer for that you know.

But it's still hard to look at.

No, not really. It's not like its DARK; the game's perfectly playable. The colors are just darker -- yellow looks brownish, for instance. But the game is completely playable... it just doesn't look quite right. It'd be tolerable... if there wasn't that bug...

You make no sense whatsoever, unless your point is that you're stupid. Now you're complaining that you don't have to buy a similar game twice??! And you don't even know is that's true or not! Again, all you have is rumor and speculation!

No, it's not a complaint... I'm just wondering what Sony will do. If they do bundle they'd have to raise prices or lose money and game sales are where they make their money... I don't know what they'll do. But bundling may well help sell more PSPs so they might do it anyway...

The removal of color certainly makes them look worse.

Oh, the lack of color is a fact that does affect impressions of the graphics, for sure, but in terms of look and scale and ... well what the games do ... the GB can match a NES, for sure...

[OB1]

I expect it (and always have). Sony wants money at least as much as Nintendo does... Though if what they say is any indication some (for new games) may be packaged in the same box.

Sony doesn't release two versions of the same game (think Pokemon again) like Nintendo does, and Sony wouldn't charge $50 for an incomplete game like Four Swords. Sony's licensing fees are insanely low, their first-party games are ten dollars less than Nintendo's, and their budget titles are also ten dollars less than Nintendo's. Case CLOSED.

That's not worth $30!

But LttP or any of the billion other SNES GBA ports are?

I bet it could do B&W NES ports...

They'd have to completely change the graphics, so it could never do straight ports.

True, most GBA games have adjusted to it. But why is it then that of my 12-13 GBC games I only notice anything in one (excepting that one that I have problems with in the GBC too...)? You don't have a good answer for that you know.

We've already established that you are not sensitive to differences in graphics. You can't even tell the difference between 15 and 30 frames per second. There's your explanation.

No, not really. It's not like its DARK; the game's perfectly playable. The colors are just darker -- yellow looks brownish, for instance. But the game is completely playable... it just doesn't look quite right. It'd be tolerable... if there wasn't that bug...

If it's anything like Dragon Warrior 3 then it looks significantly worse on the GBA than it does on the GBC.

No, it's not a complaint... I'm just wondering what Sony will do. If they do bundle they'd have to raise prices or lose money and game sales are where they make their money... I don't know what they'll do. But bundling may well help sell more PSPs so they might do it anyway...

You don't have to worry about Sony's well-being. They know what they're doing.

Oh, the lack of color is a fact that does affect impressions of the graphics, for sure, but in terms of look and scale and ... well what the games do ... the GB can match a NES, for sure...

That's the equivalent of saying "Well aside from the fact that it has no textures, Bubsy 3D looks just as good as Mario 64".

[A Black Falcon]

But LttP or any of the billion other SNES GBA ports are?

Probably not if I already owned the games... and the only port I have on GBA is LttP...

We've already established that you are not sensitive to differences in graphics. You can't even tell the difference between 15 and 30 frames per second. There's your explanation.

Yeah, right, of course...

If any of the others are any different it is to no noticable degree and is irrelevant. Given that I DO notice it with this one, I think I would given that I've played all of them on GBC...

That's the equivalent of saying "Well aside from the fact that it has no textures, Bubsy 3D looks just as good as Mario 64".

So the lack of color means they don't look as good. So? That was the way things were. Did you constantly complain about it or something ... actually given you I can easily see you doing that... I never saw the point. I remember in some old issues of EGM one of the guys always complained that the GB games didn't have color and I thought it was really stupid to mention it so often... so they don't. So? That doesn't reflect badly on them given that that's the console they are on!

You don't have to worry about Sony's well-being. They know what they're doing.

Oh come on, what I'm doing is wondering what they will do!

They'd have to completely change the graphics, so it could never do straight ports.

Just greyscale them...

Sony doesn't release two versions of the same game (think Pokemon again) like Nintendo does, and Sony wouldn't charge $50 for an incomplete game like Four Swords. Sony's licensing fees are insanely low, their first-party games are ten dollars less than Nintendo's, and their budget titles are also ten dollars less than Nintendo's. Case CLOSED.

Sony would if they thought they could get away with it.

[OB1]

Yeah, right, of course...

If any of the others are any different it is to no noticable degree and is irrelevant. Given that I DO notice it with this one, I think I would given that I've played all of them on GBC...

Deny it all you want to but I'm right. You can't differentiate between less-than-enormous visual changes.

So the lack of color means they don't look as good. So? That was the way things were. Did you constantly complain about it or something ... actually given you I can easily see you doing that... I never saw the point. I remember in some old issues of EGM one of the guys always complained that the GB games didn't have color and I thought it was really stupid to mention it so often... so they don't. So? That doesn't reflect badly on them given that that's the console they are on!

That was my point, stupid. "The lack of color means that they don't look as good". So, so dumb.

Just greyscale them...

Haha, it's not nearly that simple, ABF. If it were then the Gameboy would have gotten at least a few NES ports. But it didn't.

Sony would if they thought they could get away with it.

They wouldn't make their games so much cheaper if they thought they could get away with it?? Does that actually make sense to you?? Sony's software sells very well, and it's because of that that they can get away with selling them for so cheap! :screwy:

[A Black Falcon]

Haha, it's not nearly that simple, ABF. If it were then the Gameboy would have gotten at least a few NES ports. But it didn't.

No, but it did get SNES ports... :D (Donkey Kong Land 2 and 3 are near-identical to DKC 2 and 3)

I'd say that by far the biggest graphical issue in the standard GB is the blurring. The lack of color is just a fact you quickly get used to (or spend years griping about if you're someone like you, I guess, but I see absolutely no point)... but the blurring, that caused serious gameplay issues in some games...

Deny it all you want to but I'm right. You can't differentiate between less-than-enormous visual changes.

Yes, you certainly are the most authoritive source on what I can or can't see!

That was my point, stupid. "The lack of color means that they don't look as good". So, so dumb.

That response ignores the whole point of that paragraph. If that was too long for you, I'll make it shorter. "So?".

They wouldn't make their games so much cheaper if they thought they could get away with it?? Does that actually make sense to you?? Sony's software sells very well, and it's because of that that they can get away with selling them for so cheap!

Sony would do anything Nintendo has ever done if it thought it could get away with it and make more money out of the deal. I'm sure of that.

[OB1]

No, but it did get SNES ports... (Donkey Kong Land 2 and 3 are near-identical to DKC 2 and 3)

I'd say that by far the biggest graphical issue in the standard GB is the blurring. The lack of color is just a fact you quickly get used to (or spend years griping about if you're someone like you, I guess, but I see absolutely no point)... but the blurring, that caused serious gameplay issues in some games...

Those were ports in gameplay only.

Yes, you certainly are the most authoritive source on what I can or can't see!

Well it's about time you started realizing that!

That response ignores the whole point of that paragraph. If that was too long for you, I'll make it shorter. "So?".

Your response proved my point.

Sony would do anything Nintendo has ever done if it thought it could get away with it and make more money out of the deal. I'm sure of that.

And I'm sure that if the moon were a star it'd totally do whatever the sun does. :screwy:

Look at the facts, not your weird bizarro-universe hypothetical situations.

[A Black Falcon]

Those were ports in gameplay only.

What do you mean? Oh, they had to redo the graphics? True...

Oh, Mega Man IV (GB), at least, has levels that look like they're trying to almost copy the NES game... it's not a straight port but it just shows that they DID at times just adapt graphics from the major consoles. They kind of had to because of the screen size difference...

's about time you started realizing that!

Your response proved my point.

But it doesn't answer my question... did you or did you not complain that GB games didn't have color, like you complain about so many other things now?

From how you phrased that point it sounded like you did, you know...

And I'm sure that if the moon were a star it'd totally do whatever the sun does.

Look at the facts, not your weird bizarro-universe hypothetical situations.

Sony copies Nintendo's good ideas, but they don't copy everything... they don't copy a lot of what Nintendo is doing now because it's not exactly what you do when you want to win...

[OB1]

What do you mean? Oh, they had to redo the graphics? True...

Oh, Mega Man IV (GB), at least, has levels that look like they're trying to almost copy the NES game... it's not a straight port but it just shows that they DID at times just adapt graphics from the major consoles. They kind of had to because of the screen size difference...

Or you disagreeing with me? It always sounds like you're disagreeig with me even when you're not.

But it doesn't answer my question... did you or did you not complain that GB games didn't have color, like you complain about so many other things now?

From how you phrased that point it sounded like you did, you know...

What on earth are you talking about? When did I complain about the GB's lack of color?

[A Black Falcon]

What on earth are you talking about? When did I complain about the GB's lack of color?

The way you said that the graphics were worse without color... I mean if you've got to mention it you must find something wrong, because to me it's just a fact of the GB and I don't blame the games for it...

Or you disagreeing with me? It always sounds like you're disagreeig with me even when you're not.

I'm saying that games did base levels on major-console titles and in a couple of cases base games on them, so it wasn't impossible technically or anything. Yes, it usually did require redoing things for the screen, but that's the biggest reason they didn't do much of it, I'm sure -- the smaller screen... examples like those show that color wasn't the reason.

[OB1]

I said that because it was why the GB couldn't handle straight NES ports, you weirdo.

[A Black Falcon]

Screen size or color? It looked like you were emphasizing color more...

[OB1]

Color.

[A Black Falcon]

Then I DO disagree. I say screen size. Color is minor in comparison. Mega Man 4 and those DK Land games should help show that... okay fine DKL had major 'enemies blend in with backgrounds' problems, but that was as much the problem of the blurry GB screen as anything... and I mentioned THAT as a major flaw in the console as well. :) (if you're wondering, still, the lack of color isn't a particularly important flaw in the GB, IMO).

[OB1]

It's a lot easier to crop and resize an image then it is to change all of its colors. You can't just grey scale a NES game, you have to completely change the colors to look best with the GB's four tone pallete.

[A Black Falcon]

But the screen change is far more likely to warrant game changes than colors... I mean, when you don't do anything you get blind jumps and stuff and those are not fun...

Both are probably factors for why NES games weren't ported, though. I guess it was easier to make a new game than do all the redo they'd have to do to an existing one?

Especially, obviously, with the SNES because of how much more powerful it was than the GB.

[OB1]

It's not as tough as you think. The resize and crop the background and move around the foreground. Changing color to four tones of grey takes much more work.