Game Gear VS Game Boy

**_E_** · September 7th, 2002

Alright,......i am a big fan of Sega,.....and what i like most in this company is its dead game pad-Game Gear. Well,..i know its kinda bulky,...and needs alot batteries to run outside home,...but when i look at games such as Sonic 3 ,Sonic G and others,.....i say to myself that this is the best game pad ever released in the whole world!! Last Year, when Nintendo officially released its Game Boy Advance,....i had a look at it. its small,....power saving,...portable and looks nice. but when it comes to game play,.....i still think it needs more to beat the old Sega Game Gear. I dunno if this idea is true or not,.....i only played one game on GBA,....but do you guys have any comments regarding this? does game gear still beats GBA although its dead??

__________________

-= Moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk. The right way is not always =-
the popular and easy way. Standing for right when it is unpopular is a true test of moral character.
Margaret C. Smith

**Exophase** · September 7th, 2002

Well GBA is definitely a lot more powerful than GG... but so far most of the games I see for it that are worthwhile seem to be ports and remakes. Some more coming out later.. but the ports/remakes seem to be very well received....

- Exo

Gamer1 · September 7th, 2002

i lost interest in sega after saturn. but i love their games.

__________________
Iris: (Proc:Intel Pentium4 2.8Ghz w/ HT UNLOCKED @ 15x200) (Mobo: Asus P4C800-E) (RAM: Corsair XMS 2x512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: Lite-On 16x DVD Burner 1673S) (GFX Card: Radeon 9800 All-In-Wonder Pro 128MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy)

Morrigan: (Proc:AMD Athlon 2500+ @ 11x200) (Mobo: Asrock K7V88) (RAM: Corsair XMS 512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: NEC 16x DVD Burner 3200AG) (GFX Card: Radeon 920064MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Live! 5.1)

Ninjaa · September 8th, 2002

I never liked Game Gear due to its size, and unportability. (In my mind, a handheld needs to be portable).

Advance Wars simply rocks though. If anyone here has a GBA, RUN don't walk to the store and buy this game. It's a really fun game. I am so glad they finally brought this series to the US.

But with games like Seiken Densetsu, Magical Vacation, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicle, and Final Fantasy Tactics forthcoming for GBA, I think the prize definately belongs with GBA. (Remember that it's only like 2 years old too)

**Kane** · September 8th, 2002

GBA owns coz of it's lower batter consumption, better GFX, and smaller, more comfortable size.

__________________

>Site Live<
Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators.
Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible
Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business
Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE
Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

Decoy_Octopus · September 9th, 2002

GBA, better everything.

__________________
"I contend that any game that draws people in is a good thing, because the more people play computer games,
the more the hobby becomes legitimized and loses its social-retard status."- Jeff Green

Gamer1 · September 9th, 2002

except the screen is too dark

__________________
Iris: (Proc:Intel Pentium4 2.8Ghz w/ HT UNLOCKED @ 15x200) (Mobo: Asus P4C800-E) (RAM: Corsair XMS 2x512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: Lite-On 16x DVD Burner 1673S) (GFX Card: Radeon 9800 All-In-Wonder Pro 128MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy)

Morrigan: (Proc:AMD Athlon 2500+ @ 11x200) (Mobo: Asrock K7V88) (RAM: Corsair XMS 512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: NEC 16x DVD Burner 3200AG) (GFX Card: Radeon 920064MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Live! 5.1)

**Kane** · September 9th, 2002

Get an external light, or mod it yourself.

__________________

>Site Live<
Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators.
Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible
Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business
Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE
Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

**Exophase** · September 9th, 2002

Comparing the games isn't very fair when one's been dead for years, don't you think...? I guess in the handheld world everything is muddled when a dominating company holds back development so new handhelds seem years old *cough cough*

- Exo

Ninjaa · September 9th, 2002

eh? Didn't I already go through that with someone else?

Nintendo was just waiting until the technology was small, cheap, and non-power consuming. I mean really, comparing the GBA to Game Gear is kind of a moot point. the Game Gear was never portable, and that's why Nintendo didn't make an equivalent, and guess what? That's why the GB won that one, even though it was monochrome.

Last edited by Ninja; September 9th, 2002 at 05:22..

**Exophase** · September 9th, 2002

You keep telling yourself that.. while anyone else who knows anything about hardware knows that handhelds are way behind where they could be.. heh.. ^_-

How was GG not portable? And it's moot point, not "mute point" d00d.

- Exo

grahf · September 9th, 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by Exophase
You keep telling yourself that.. while anyone else who knows anything about hardware knows that handhelds are way behind where they could be.. heh.. ^_-

How was GG not portable? And it's moot point, not "mute point" d00d.

- Exo

1) You're really rude. So he makes a typo, and you assume he's stupid? Heh, I find your condescending attitude rather funny seeing as how you're a self-proclaim "not an emulator author".

2) Ninja was right, the GG was NOT portable for the fact that the battery consumson was so great that you literally had to be next to a outlet to play it properly. That's one of the reason why it was not a success; nobody want to play a supposedly portable machine next to a power outlet.

3) Handhelds aren't "way behind" anything. By purpose, there function was and always has been to be cheap portable gaming devices. This is what the GB/GBA is. Cheap portable gaming devices with great software support. Now I don't know how much you know about hardware, but I'd like you to show me any handheld system that's comparable to a SNES going for under 80 bucks. I'm sorry but palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks and cell phones aren't meant to be gaming devices.

__________________

Ninjaa · September 9th, 2002

ok ok... It's been years since I was in an english class. Besides, i had to memorize 15 hiragana tonight, and that's still ringing in my head.

Game Gear was barely portable. It was obscenely large, and used way too many batteries.

But I will admit that there are ways of producing a better handheld. but answer me this. How much would it cost to make such a handheld? How many batteries would it consume?

i know that I wouldn't pay much more than $150 for a handheld, and Nintendo does sell them at a price that's barely profitable.

EDIT: I posted at the same time as Grahf. Thanks for backing me up dude, but it's really ok. Me and exophase have fought eachother plenty of times around here before. he really doesn't like fanboys, and will disagree with me every time, regardless of whether I am right or wrong. I find it amusing.

**Exophase** · September 9th, 2002

Game Gear was barely portable. It was obscenely large, and used way too many batteries.

It wasn't "obscenely large" at all! I owned GG, GB, GBC, Atari Lynx, and could play all comfortably. I have small hands. Just because it was larger than Nintendo handhelds doesn't mean it was too large.

But I will admit that there are ways of producing a better handheld. but answer me this. How much would it cost to make such a handheld? How many batteries would it consume?

Okay, then answer me this if you will: if something can be "barely handheld" if it consumes too much battery power than how about if it's not even playable unless under the ideal conditions? Without backlighting Nintendo consoles must be played with a pretty strong lightsource, and I'd say about half the time they're difficult to play with natural light, because of glare. This was the handheld I've owned the longest and played the most, so I'm not pulling this out of my ass. So anyway, that means most of the time you'd be playing it would be indoors, where you could plug the thing in anyway, like I did with my GG/Lynx. They were great for on the road at night, could never play a GB then....

And to answer your question, you can obviously cram more into a handheld for the same price as the GBA. Do you realize how underclocked the GBA is? And it's not the ARM that's sucking a lot of power, it's backlit screens that do that, and naturally Nintendo's ALWAYS avoided those.

i know that I wouldn't pay much more than $150 for a handheld, and Nintendo does sell them at a price that's barely profitable.

Well that's you; enter the real world, consoles cost money, usually around $200. If handhelds should be treated as serious consoles, why should they have to be value parts? You probably paid $200 for a GCN, why not for a good handheld? I know, because you expect them to be hideously underpowered.

Let's get to the point; Nintendo has a successful monopoly on handhelds, and it's staying that way. Other companies are too afraid to try, at least in the US. The few that have bothered lately have quickly pulled out after being intimidated by Nintendo.

You're probably going to call me a Sony fanboy or something for saying this, but Sony could probably put together a much better handheld if they gave a damn. Why am I saying this? Because Sony has many many years of experience in handheld technology and integrated devices; the PSX integrates on one SINGLE die a decent CPU, JPEG decompression, geometric/3D acceleration and wavetable sound. What does GBA have.. er.. an underclocked ARM and 2D graphics, no real dedicated sound except very basic 2 channel mixing and the abomination that's the GB sound. Because Sony has the resources to manufacture their own chips they could probably make a cheaper and more power friendly handheld, but it's just not going to happen. They just don't care. And it sucks.

he really doesn't like fanboys, and will disagree with me every time, regardless of whether I am right or wrong. I find it amusing.

Oh please. You're that egotistical to think I base my arguments simply around the fact that you brought something up? This isn't the first time I said something negatively about the GBA (hardware OR software), and this isn't going to be the last time either, and just because you happen to be a Nintendo zealot times 100 doesn't make you any more right than I am. Yeah, try to invalidate what I say by "I disagree even if you're right" and ignore the points I do happen to make, of course YOU always think you're right, naturally. But what do you really know about hardware costs? Portable ones.. yeah, you know what Nintendo feeds you, and probably very little else.

- Exo

**Exophase** · September 9th, 2002

And now for the spineless croney (now THAT'S being rude)

1) You're really rude. So he makes a typo, and you assume he's stupid? Heh, I find your condescending attitude rather funny seeing as how you're a self-proclaim "not an emulator author".

Did I say he was stupid? No, don't shove words into my mouth b0y. Yeah, I'm not an emu author, so? That doesn't mean I don't know anything.

2) Ninja was right, the GG was NOT portable for the fact that the battery consumson was so great that you literally had to be next to a outlet to play it properly. That's one of the reason why it was not a success; nobody want to play a supposedly portable machine next to a power outlet.

Yes, and now we're all using your definition of portable eh? It could be played on its own. It's portable. Period. You're underrating its power consumption, you can't ignore it even if it's ~6 hours, which is fine for many situations; just needs charging quite a bit.

3) Handhelds aren't "way behind" anything. By purpose, there function was and always has been to be cheap portable gaming devices. This is what the GB/GBA is. Cheap portable gaming devices with great software support.

Pfft, wanna talk about cheap portable devices.. okay, look at the PocketPC's that are way beyond what GBA is and maybe what Nintendo will ever manage to produce. Too expensive for you? Like it or not handheld hardware is nothing what it could be, and yes, I blame Nintendo for monopolizing the market. Software has nothing to do with this, but if you want I could give a delightful rant about a system with a library that's practically full of nothing but ports and remakes.

Now I don't know how much you know about hardware, but I'd like you to show me any handheld system that's comparable to a SNES going for under 80 bucks. I'm sorry but palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks and cell phones aren't meant to be gaming devices.

As high as 500 bucks.. okay.. whatever.. there are $200 PocketPC's that are like 10x more powerful than GBA.. I'm not asking for 10x, but something as cheap as GBA could be more powerful. How much do YOU know about hardware to invalidate this? Read my previous post. Bye.

- Exo

Ninjaa · September 9th, 2002

It wasn't "obscenely large" at all! I owned GG, GB, GBC, Atari Lynx, and could play all comfortably. I have small hands. Just because it was larger than Nintendo handhelds doesn't mean it was too large.

It weighed a ton. But it's kind of stupid to argue this point, as it's all a matter of opinion. (Mind you mine is the popular opinion)

Okay, then answer me this if you will: if something can be "barely handheld" if it consumes too much battery power than how about if it's not even playable unless under the ideal conditions? Without backlighting Nintendo consoles must be played with a pretty strong lightsource, and I'd say about half the time they're difficult to play with natural light, because of glare. This was the handheld I've owned the longest and played the most, so I'm not pulling this out of my ass. So anyway, that means most of the time you'd be playing it would be indoors, where you could plug the thing in anyway, like I did with my GG/Lynx. They were great for on the road at night, could never play a GB then....

That's what reading lights are for. I rode a Greyhound bus for 20 hours recently, and my GBA was beside me the whole time, whether it was light or dark. Advance Wars is a kick @ss game. It's true that they are difficult to play with natural light, but if you find the right spot, everything is clear. And I have played my GBA while walking. (although I did crash a whole lot)

And to answer your question, you can obviously cram more into a handheld for the same price as the GBA. Do you realize how underclocked the GBA is? And it's not the ARM that's sucking a lot of power, it's backlit screens that do that, and naturally Nintendo's ALWAYS avoided those.

Frankly, I don't care how underclocked the GBA is. I'm sure that there is a valid reason, as Nintendo doesn't sabotage it's own consoles.

Well that's you; enter the real world, consoles cost money, usually around $200. If handhelds should be treated as serious consoles, why should they have to be value parts? You probably paid $200 for a GCN, why not for a good handheld? I know, because you expect them to be hideously underpowered.

Handhelds aren't consoles. I will play my console for a good 4 to 6 hours at a time, and I will play my handheld for 15 minute intervals when I am away from home. I don't expect it to be hideously underpowered, I just expect it to be low priced. Luckily, the GBA is both advanced and low priced.

Let's get to the point; Nintendo has a successful monopoly on handhelds, and it's staying that way. Other companies are too afraid to try, at least in the US. The few that have bothered lately have quickly pulled out after being intimidated by Nintendo.

Too afraid to try. That's just so much crap that it's unbelievable. Wonderswan color was a competitor in Japan, but it died because it was a crappy hendheld that was barely better than the GBC, and Squaresoft was the only developer left supporting it after the GBA came out.

You're probably going to call me a Sony fanboy or something for saying this, but Sony could probably put together a much better handheld if they gave a damn. Why am I saying this? Because Sony has many many years of experience in handheld technology and integrated devices; the PSX integrates on one SINGLE die a decent CPU, JPEG decompression, geometric/3D acceleration and wavetable sound. What does GBA have.. er.. an underclocked ARM and 2D graphics, no real dedicated sound except very basic 2 channel mixing and the abomination that's the GB sound. Because Sony has the resources to manufacture their own chips they could probably make a cheaper and more power friendly handheld, but it's just not going to happen. They just don't care. And it sucks.

Sony did make a handheld. It was called the pocketstation. And if you think that the GB uses archaic technology, you haven't seen nothing yet. And no, I don't think you are a fanboy, I think you are an anti-fanboy, as I have said. Speaking of which, your tone has gotten seriously more sullen since we have last talked. What's the matter?

Oh please. You're that egotistical to think I base my arguments simply around the fact that you brought something up? This isn't the first time I said something negatively about the GBA (hardware OR software), and this isn't going to be the last time either, and just because you happen to be a Nintendo zealot times 100 doesn't make you any more right than I am. Yeah, try to invalidate what I say by "I disagree even if you're right" and ignore the points I do happen to make, of course YOU always think you're right, naturally. But what do you really know about hardware costs? Portable ones.. yeah, you know what Nintendo feeds you, and probably very little else.

You didn't used to be this far gone. You just sound angry right now. Take a walk and cool off ok?

**mikeshoup** · September 9th, 2002

3) Handhelds aren't "way behind" anything. By purpose, there function was and always has been to be cheap portable gaming devices. This is what the GB/GBA is. Cheap portable gaming devices with great software support. Now I don't know how much you know about hardware, but I'd like you to show me any handheld system that's comparable to a SNES going for under 80 bucks. I'm sorry but palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks and cell phones aren't meant to be gaming devices.

Pfft. Palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks? yes, but you forgot to mention they go for as low as 100 bucks. Do your research man! And besides, my PalmIIIc which is 2 years old is nearly comparable to a GBA. And granted, it isn't meant for gaming, but I can do gaming.

__________________
mikeshoup.com | Facebook | Twitter

Ninjaa · September 9th, 2002

And now for the spineless croney (now THAT'S being rude)

Be nice.

Did I say he was stupid? No, don't shove words into my mouth b0y. Yeah, I'm not an emu author, so? That doesn't mean I don't know anything.

Don't give me that. You've always insinuated that I was deluded, and have frequently left little notes between the lines. but granted, you did not insinuate that I was stupid in this case. You merely used a slight mistake as a way of further poking me.

Yes, and now we're all using your definition of portable eh? It could be played on its own. It's portable. Period. You're underrating its power consumption, you can't ignore it even if it's ~6 hours, which is fine for many situations; just needs charging quite a bit.

It also uses like 3 times the number of batteries as the GBA, and they die in like half the time. If you don't have rechargable batteries, it's just not worth it. The thing is that the GG is like being tied to a tether. That restricts the portability. with the GBA you can just run to the nearest dollar store and buy a pack of 4 batteries for a dollar and you are good to go.

Pfft, wanna talk about cheap portable devices.. okay, look at the PocketPC's that are way beyond what GBA is and maybe what Nintendo will ever manage to produce. Too expensive for you? Like it or not handheld hardware is nothing what it could be, and yes, I blame Nintendo for monopolizing the market. Software has nothing to do with this, but if you want I could give a delightful rant about a system with a library that's practically full of nothing but ports and remakes.

there are a few ports on the GBA, but I think it's immediately clear that 95% of the GBA's library is original. It's just that a few good SNES games have been ported.

And it's not like Nintendo monopolized the market. After Sega dropped out, there was just no competition left. If nintendo's handhelds were really so crappy, then any new company could easily build an uber handheld and replace them as king. Why don't you do it if you are so knowledgable in such things?

As high as 500 bucks.. okay.. whatever.. there are $200 PocketPC's that are like 10x more powerful than GBA.. I'm not asking for 10x, but something as cheap as GBA could be more powerful. How much do YOU know about hardware to invalidate this? Read my previous post. Bye.

show me some prices, and exactly how the PocketPC stacks up to the GBA. You of course realize that a 486 is more powerful than a PSX, but you couldn't get nearly as much for the 486 right? It could be a similar situation here. As the new Palm PCs come in, the old ones get devalued maybe eh? I know that the GBA could similarly be replaced every 6 months, but that would just be stupid wouldn't it?

**Exophase** · September 9th, 2002

That's what reading lights are for. I rode a Greyhound bus for 20 hours recently, and my GBA was beside me the whole time, whether it was light or dark.

Heh, reading lights.. yeah, that REALLY makes it portable. I tried the clip on lights, I could never use them comfortably, I guess you had much better luck than me.

Frankly, I don't care how underclocked the GBA is. I'm sure that there is a valid reason, as Nintendo doesn't sabotage it's own consoles.

If they intentionally cripple the market and keep growth they will be able to continue dominating...

Handhelds aren't consoles.

They aren't totally, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be some overlap (I don't mean like the link up on GBA/GCN)... and that doesn't mean they have to be doomed to 2D for all eternity.

I will play my console for a good 4 to 6 hours at a time, and I will play my handheld for 15 minute intervals when I am away from home. I don't expect it to be hideously underpowered, I just expect it to be low priced. Luckily, the GBA is both advanced and low priced.

That's fine, but it'd be nice if there was an alternative. More powerful and somewhat more expensive handhelds would have a place too.

Too afraid to try. That's just so much crap that it's unbelievable. Wonderswan color was a competitor in Japan, but it died because it was a crappy hendheld that was barely better than the GBC, and Squaresoft was the only developer left supporting it after the GBA came out.

Yes, IN JAPAN. Why do you think they never released it here, or anywhere else? Because Nintendo has way too much of a grip on the market. Same reason NeoGeo Pocket/Color folded, same reason we see no GP32 here (much better than the GBA)... etc.

Sony did make a handheld. It was called the pocketstation.

That doesn't count.

That was more of a PDA. If you're suggesting that that's Sony's idea of a proper handheld, then I'd have to agree that Sony is incredibly screwed up. Well, like I said, I think Sony has the means to do it, but neither the sense nor the guts. And if they made it half as defective as PSX/PS2.. oh man...

And if you think that the GB uses archaic technology, you haven't seen nothing yet. And no, I don't think you are a fanboy, I think you are an anti-fanboy, as I have said. Speaking of which, your tone has gotten seriously more sullen since we have last talked. What's the matter?

Offensive comments about me arguing with you when you're right just because you're you, random people jumping in to mouth off at me (Grahf)... is making me pissed.

GBA isn't archaic, but it's not where it could be. I'd have hoped that the bleeding edge of handhelds would pushed hardware further. Non-gaming oriented handhelds shouldn't be the gaming platforms of choice hardware-wise. You could probably emulate GBA quite well on some PocketPC's if you tried...

You didn't used to be this far gone. You just sound angry right now. Take a walk and cool off ok?

No, I'm going to sleep actually.. but enh. I'd like it if you'd quit acting like I only argue with you because I have some kind of grudge against you. You happen to be in a position that is naturally highly conflicting with mine and this comes up a lot. That's all.

- Exo

Ninjaa · September 9th, 2002

Something tells me that this thread is going to be locked with a message along the lines of "Looks like Exophase and Ninja have done it again." (bring back memories?

) But if this thread is still open tomorrow, i will continue this then. right now I am going home and going to sleep. And maybe I'll smoke my last cigarette. (I can't afford more).

September 7th, 2002	#1 (permalink)
_E_ Lurking Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Gone Posts: 8,958	Game Gear VS Game Boy Alright,......i am a big fan of Sega,.....and what i like most in this company is its dead game pad-Game Gear. Well,..i know its kinda bulky,...and needs alot batteries to run outside home,...but when i look at games such as Sonic 3 ,Sonic G and others,.....i say to myself that this is the best game pad ever released in the whole world!! Last Year, when Nintendo officially released its Game Boy Advance,....i had a look at it. its small,....power saving,...portable and looks nice. but when it comes to game play,.....i still think it needs more to beat the old Sega Game Gear. I dunno if this idea is true or not,.....i only played one game on GBA,....but do you guys have any comments regarding this? does game gear still beats GBA although its dead?? __________________ -= Moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk. The right way is not always =- the popular and easy way. Standing for right when it is unpopular is a true test of moral character. Margaret C. Smith

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

September 7th, 2002	#2 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	Well GBA is definitely a lot more powerful than GG... but so far most of the games I see for it that are worthwhile seem to be ports and remakes. Some more coming out later.. but the ports/remakes seem to be very well received.... - Exo

September 7th, 2002	#3 (permalink)
Gamer1 Anti-Brand Loyalist Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Its too dark to tell... Posts: 3,241	i lost interest in sega after saturn. but i love their games. __________________ Iris: (Proc:Intel Pentium4 2.8Ghz w/ HT UNLOCKED @ 15x200) (Mobo: Asus P4C800-E) (RAM: Corsair XMS 2x512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: Lite-On 16x DVD Burner 1673S) (GFX Card: Radeon 9800 All-In-Wonder Pro 128MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy) Morrigan: (Proc:AMD Athlon 2500+ @ 11x200) (Mobo: Asrock K7V88) (RAM: Corsair XMS 512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: NEC 16x DVD Burner 3200AG) (GFX Card: Radeon 920064MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Live! 5.1)

September 8th, 2002	#4 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	I never liked Game Gear due to its size, and unportability. (In my mind, a handheld needs to be portable). Advance Wars simply rocks though. If anyone here has a GBA, RUN don't walk to the store and buy this game. It's a really fun game. I am so glad they finally brought this series to the US. But with games like Seiken Densetsu, Magical Vacation, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicle, and Final Fantasy Tactics forthcoming for GBA, I think the prize definately belongs with GBA. (Remember that it's only like 2 years old too)

September 8th, 2002	#5 (permalink)
Kane 邪魔ゎ指せない Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Gosport, England Posts: 26,305	GBA owns coz of it's lower batter consumption, better GFX, and smaller, more comfortable size. __________________ >Site Live< Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators. Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

September 9th, 2002	#6 (permalink)
Decoy_Octopus Master of Disguise Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Here... again... Posts: 1,508	GBA, better everything. __________________ "I contend that any game that draws people in is a good thing, because the more people play computer games, the more the hobby becomes legitimized and loses its social-retard status."- Jeff Green

September 9th, 2002	#7 (permalink)
Gamer1 Anti-Brand Loyalist Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Its too dark to tell... Posts: 3,241	except the screen is too dark __________________ Iris: (Proc:Intel Pentium4 2.8Ghz w/ HT UNLOCKED @ 15x200) (Mobo: Asus P4C800-E) (RAM: Corsair XMS 2x512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: Lite-On 16x DVD Burner 1673S) (GFX Card: Radeon 9800 All-In-Wonder Pro 128MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy) Morrigan: (Proc:AMD Athlon 2500+ @ 11x200) (Mobo: Asrock K7V88) (RAM: Corsair XMS 512MB DDR400) (HDD 1: Seagate 80GB, 8MB Buffer, 7200 RPM) (Disk Drive 1: NEC 16x DVD Burner 3200AG) (GFX Card: Radeon 920064MB) (Sound Card: Sound Blaster Live! 5.1)

September 9th, 2002	#8 (permalink)
Kane 邪魔ゎ指せない Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Gosport, England Posts: 26,305	Get an external light, or mod it yourself. __________________ >Site Live< Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators. Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

September 9th, 2002	#9 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	Comparing the games isn't very fair when one's been dead for years, don't you think...? I guess in the handheld world everything is muddled when a dominating company holds back development so new handhelds seem years old cough cough - Exo

September 9th, 2002	#10 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	eh? Didn't I already go through that with someone else? Nintendo was just waiting until the technology was small, cheap, and non-power consuming. I mean really, comparing the GBA to Game Gear is kind of a moot point. the Game Gear was never portable, and that's why Nintendo didn't make an equivalent, and guess what? That's why the GB won that one, even though it was monochrome. Last edited by Ninja; September 9th, 2002 at 05:22..

September 9th, 2002	#11 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	You keep telling yourself that.. while anyone else who knows anything about hardware knows that handhelds are way behind where they could be.. heh.. ^_- How was GG not portable? And it's moot point, not "mute point" d00d. - Exo

September 9th, 2002	#13 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	ok ok... It's been years since I was in an english class. Besides, i had to memorize 15 hiragana tonight, and that's still ringing in my head. Game Gear was barely portable. It was obscenely large, and used way too many batteries. But I will admit that there are ways of producing a better handheld. but answer me this. How much would it cost to make such a handheld? How many batteries would it consume? i know that I wouldn't pay much more than $150 for a handheld, and Nintendo does sell them at a price that's barely profitable. EDIT: I posted at the same time as Grahf. Thanks for backing me up dude, but it's really ok. Me and exophase have fought eachother plenty of times around here before. he really doesn't like fanboys, and will disagree with me every time, regardless of whether I am right or wrong. I find it amusing.

September 9th, 2002	#14 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	Game Gear was barely portable. It was obscenely large, and used way too many batteries. It wasn't "obscenely large" at all! I owned GG, GB, GBC, Atari Lynx, and could play all comfortably. I have small hands. Just because it was larger than Nintendo handhelds doesn't mean it was too large. But I will admit that there are ways of producing a better handheld. but answer me this. How much would it cost to make such a handheld? How many batteries would it consume? Okay, then answer me this if you will: if something can be "barely handheld" if it consumes too much battery power than how about if it's not even playable unless under the ideal conditions? Without backlighting Nintendo consoles must be played with a pretty strong lightsource, and I'd say about half the time they're difficult to play with natural light, because of glare. This was the handheld I've owned the longest and played the most, so I'm not pulling this out of my ass. So anyway, that means most of the time you'd be playing it would be indoors, where you could plug the thing in anyway, like I did with my GG/Lynx. They were great for on the road at night, could never play a GB then.... And to answer your question, you can obviously cram more into a handheld for the same price as the GBA. Do you realize how underclocked the GBA is? And it's not the ARM that's sucking a lot of power, it's backlit screens that do that, and naturally Nintendo's ALWAYS avoided those. i know that I wouldn't pay much more than $150 for a handheld, and Nintendo does sell them at a price that's barely profitable. Well that's you; enter the real world, consoles cost money, usually around $200. If handhelds should be treated as serious consoles, why should they have to be value parts? You probably paid $200 for a GCN, why not for a good handheld? I know, because you expect them to be hideously underpowered. Let's get to the point; Nintendo has a successful monopoly on handhelds, and it's staying that way. Other companies are too afraid to try, at least in the US. The few that have bothered lately have quickly pulled out after being intimidated by Nintendo. You're probably going to call me a Sony fanboy or something for saying this, but Sony could probably put together a much better handheld if they gave a damn. Why am I saying this? Because Sony has many many years of experience in handheld technology and integrated devices; the PSX integrates on one SINGLE die a decent CPU, JPEG decompression, geometric/3D acceleration and wavetable sound. What does GBA have.. er.. an underclocked ARM and 2D graphics, no real dedicated sound except very basic 2 channel mixing and the abomination that's the GB sound. Because Sony has the resources to manufacture their own chips they could probably make a cheaper and more power friendly handheld, but it's just not going to happen. They just don't care. And it sucks. he really doesn't like fanboys, and will disagree with me every time, regardless of whether I am right or wrong. I find it amusing. Oh please. You're that egotistical to think I base my arguments simply around the fact that you brought something up? This isn't the first time I said something negatively about the GBA (hardware OR software), and this isn't going to be the last time either, and just because you happen to be a Nintendo zealot times 100 doesn't make you any more right than I am. Yeah, try to invalidate what I say by "I disagree even if you're right" and ignore the points I do happen to make, of course YOU always think you're right, naturally. But what do you really know about hardware costs? Portable ones.. yeah, you know what Nintendo feeds you, and probably very little else. - Exo

September 9th, 2002	#15 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	And now for the spineless croney (now THAT'S being rude) 1) You're really rude. So he makes a typo, and you assume he's stupid? Heh, I find your condescending attitude rather funny seeing as how you're a self-proclaim "not an emulator author". Did I say he was stupid? No, don't shove words into my mouth b0y. Yeah, I'm not an emu author, so? That doesn't mean I don't know anything. 2) Ninja was right, the GG was NOT portable for the fact that the battery consumson was so great that you literally had to be next to a outlet to play it properly. That's one of the reason why it was not a success; nobody want to play a supposedly portable machine next to a power outlet. Yes, and now we're all using your definition of portable eh? It could be played on its own. It's portable. Period. You're underrating its power consumption, you can't ignore it even if it's ~6 hours, which is fine for many situations; just needs charging quite a bit. 3) Handhelds aren't "way behind" anything. By purpose, there function was and always has been to be cheap portable gaming devices. This is what the GB/GBA is. Cheap portable gaming devices with great software support. Pfft, wanna talk about cheap portable devices.. okay, look at the PocketPC's that are way beyond what GBA is and maybe what Nintendo will ever manage to produce. Too expensive for you? Like it or not handheld hardware is nothing what it could be, and yes, I blame Nintendo for monopolizing the market. Software has nothing to do with this, but if you want I could give a delightful rant about a system with a library that's practically full of nothing but ports and remakes. Now I don't know how much you know about hardware, but I'd like you to show me any handheld system that's comparable to a SNES going for under 80 bucks. I'm sorry but palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks and cell phones aren't meant to be gaming devices. As high as 500 bucks.. okay.. whatever.. there are $200 PocketPC's that are like 10x more powerful than GBA.. I'm not asking for 10x, but something as cheap as GBA could be more powerful. How much do YOU know about hardware to invalidate this? Read my previous post. Bye. - Exo

September 9th, 2002	#16 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	It wasn't "obscenely large" at all! I owned GG, GB, GBC, Atari Lynx, and could play all comfortably. I have small hands. Just because it was larger than Nintendo handhelds doesn't mean it was too large. It weighed a ton. But it's kind of stupid to argue this point, as it's all a matter of opinion. (Mind you mine is the popular opinion) Okay, then answer me this if you will: if something can be "barely handheld" if it consumes too much battery power than how about if it's not even playable unless under the ideal conditions? Without backlighting Nintendo consoles must be played with a pretty strong lightsource, and I'd say about half the time they're difficult to play with natural light, because of glare. This was the handheld I've owned the longest and played the most, so I'm not pulling this out of my ass. So anyway, that means most of the time you'd be playing it would be indoors, where you could plug the thing in anyway, like I did with my GG/Lynx. They were great for on the road at night, could never play a GB then.... That's what reading lights are for. I rode a Greyhound bus for 20 hours recently, and my GBA was beside me the whole time, whether it was light or dark. Advance Wars is a kick @ss game. It's true that they are difficult to play with natural light, but if you find the right spot, everything is clear. And I have played my GBA while walking. (although I did crash a whole lot) And to answer your question, you can obviously cram more into a handheld for the same price as the GBA. Do you realize how underclocked the GBA is? And it's not the ARM that's sucking a lot of power, it's backlit screens that do that, and naturally Nintendo's ALWAYS avoided those. Frankly, I don't care how underclocked the GBA is. I'm sure that there is a valid reason, as Nintendo doesn't sabotage it's own consoles. Well that's you; enter the real world, consoles cost money, usually around $200. If handhelds should be treated as serious consoles, why should they have to be value parts? You probably paid $200 for a GCN, why not for a good handheld? I know, because you expect them to be hideously underpowered. Handhelds aren't consoles. I will play my console for a good 4 to 6 hours at a time, and I will play my handheld for 15 minute intervals when I am away from home. I don't expect it to be hideously underpowered, I just expect it to be low priced. Luckily, the GBA is both advanced and low priced. Let's get to the point; Nintendo has a successful monopoly on handhelds, and it's staying that way. Other companies are too afraid to try, at least in the US. The few that have bothered lately have quickly pulled out after being intimidated by Nintendo. Too afraid to try. That's just so much crap that it's unbelievable. Wonderswan color was a competitor in Japan, but it died because it was a crappy hendheld that was barely better than the GBC, and Squaresoft was the only developer left supporting it after the GBA came out. You're probably going to call me a Sony fanboy or something for saying this, but Sony could probably put together a much better handheld if they gave a damn. Why am I saying this? Because Sony has many many years of experience in handheld technology and integrated devices; the PSX integrates on one SINGLE die a decent CPU, JPEG decompression, geometric/3D acceleration and wavetable sound. What does GBA have.. er.. an underclocked ARM and 2D graphics, no real dedicated sound except very basic 2 channel mixing and the abomination that's the GB sound. Because Sony has the resources to manufacture their own chips they could probably make a cheaper and more power friendly handheld, but it's just not going to happen. They just don't care. And it sucks. Sony did make a handheld. It was called the pocketstation. And if you think that the GB uses archaic technology, you haven't seen nothing yet. And no, I don't think you are a fanboy, I think you are an anti-fanboy, as I have said. Speaking of which, your tone has gotten seriously more sullen since we have last talked. What's the matter? Oh please. You're that egotistical to think I base my arguments simply around the fact that you brought something up? This isn't the first time I said something negatively about the GBA (hardware OR software), and this isn't going to be the last time either, and just because you happen to be a Nintendo zealot times 100 doesn't make you any more right than I am. Yeah, try to invalidate what I say by "I disagree even if you're right" and ignore the points I do happen to make, of course YOU always think you're right, naturally. But what do you really know about hardware costs? Portable ones.. yeah, you know what Nintendo feeds you, and probably very little else. You didn't used to be this far gone. You just sound angry right now. Take a walk and cool off ok?

September 9th, 2002	#17 (permalink)
mikeshoup Old Man Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Denver, CO, USA Posts: 289	3) Handhelds aren't "way behind" anything. By purpose, there function was and always has been to be cheap portable gaming devices. This is what the GB/GBA is. Cheap portable gaming devices with great software support. Now I don't know how much you know about hardware, but I'd like you to show me any handheld system that's comparable to a SNES going for under 80 bucks. I'm sorry but palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks and cell phones aren't meant to be gaming devices. Pfft. Palm computers go for as high as 500 bucks? yes, but you forgot to mention they go for as low as 100 bucks. Do your research man! And besides, my PalmIIIc which is 2 years old is nearly comparable to a GBA. And granted, it isn't meant for gaming, but I can do gaming. __________________ mikeshoup.com \| Facebook \| Twitter

September 9th, 2002	#18 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	And now for the spineless croney (now THAT'S being rude) Be nice. Did I say he was stupid? No, don't shove words into my mouth b0y. Yeah, I'm not an emu author, so? That doesn't mean I don't know anything. Don't give me that. You've always insinuated that I was deluded, and have frequently left little notes between the lines. but granted, you did not insinuate that I was stupid in this case. You merely used a slight mistake as a way of further poking me. Yes, and now we're all using your definition of portable eh? It could be played on its own. It's portable. Period. You're underrating its power consumption, you can't ignore it even if it's ~6 hours, which is fine for many situations; just needs charging quite a bit. It also uses like 3 times the number of batteries as the GBA, and they die in like half the time. If you don't have rechargable batteries, it's just not worth it. The thing is that the GG is like being tied to a tether. That restricts the portability. with the GBA you can just run to the nearest dollar store and buy a pack of 4 batteries for a dollar and you are good to go. Pfft, wanna talk about cheap portable devices.. okay, look at the PocketPC's that are way beyond what GBA is and maybe what Nintendo will ever manage to produce. Too expensive for you? Like it or not handheld hardware is nothing what it could be, and yes, I blame Nintendo for monopolizing the market. Software has nothing to do with this, but if you want I could give a delightful rant about a system with a library that's practically full of nothing but ports and remakes. there are a few ports on the GBA, but I think it's immediately clear that 95% of the GBA's library is original. It's just that a few good SNES games have been ported. And it's not like Nintendo monopolized the market. After Sega dropped out, there was just no competition left. If nintendo's handhelds were really so crappy, then any new company could easily build an uber handheld and replace them as king. Why don't you do it if you are so knowledgable in such things? As high as 500 bucks.. okay.. whatever.. there are $200 PocketPC's that are like 10x more powerful than GBA.. I'm not asking for 10x, but something as cheap as GBA could be more powerful. How much do YOU know about hardware to invalidate this? Read my previous post. Bye. show me some prices, and exactly how the PocketPC stacks up to the GBA. You of course realize that a 486 is more powerful than a PSX, but you couldn't get nearly as much for the 486 right? It could be a similar situation here. As the new Palm PCs come in, the old ones get devalued maybe eh? I know that the GBA could similarly be replaced every 6 months, but that would just be stupid wouldn't it?

September 9th, 2002	#19 (permalink)
Exophase Emu author Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Cleveland OH, USA Posts: 1,184	That's what reading lights are for. I rode a Greyhound bus for 20 hours recently, and my GBA was beside me the whole time, whether it was light or dark. Heh, reading lights.. yeah, that REALLY makes it portable. I tried the clip on lights, I could never use them comfortably, I guess you had much better luck than me. Frankly, I don't care how underclocked the GBA is. I'm sure that there is a valid reason, as Nintendo doesn't sabotage it's own consoles. If they intentionally cripple the market and keep growth they will be able to continue dominating... Handhelds aren't consoles. They aren't totally, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be some overlap (I don't mean like the link up on GBA/GCN)... and that doesn't mean they have to be doomed to 2D for all eternity. I will play my console for a good 4 to 6 hours at a time, and I will play my handheld for 15 minute intervals when I am away from home. I don't expect it to be hideously underpowered, I just expect it to be low priced. Luckily, the GBA is both advanced and low priced. That's fine, but it'd be nice if there was an alternative. More powerful and somewhat more expensive handhelds would have a place too. Too afraid to try. That's just so much crap that it's unbelievable. Wonderswan color was a competitor in Japan, but it died because it was a crappy hendheld that was barely better than the GBC, and Squaresoft was the only developer left supporting it after the GBA came out. Yes, IN JAPAN. Why do you think they never released it here, or anywhere else? Because Nintendo has way too much of a grip on the market. Same reason NeoGeo Pocket/Color folded, same reason we see no GP32 here (much better than the GBA)... etc. Sony did make a handheld. It was called the pocketstation. That doesn't count. That was more of a PDA. If you're suggesting that that's Sony's idea of a proper handheld, then I'd have to agree that Sony is incredibly screwed up. Well, like I said, I think Sony has the means to do it, but neither the sense nor the guts. And if they made it half as defective as PSX/PS2.. oh man... And if you think that the GB uses archaic technology, you haven't seen nothing yet. And no, I don't think you are a fanboy, I think you are an anti-fanboy, as I have said. Speaking of which, your tone has gotten seriously more sullen since we have last talked. What's the matter? Offensive comments about me arguing with you when you're right just because you're you, random people jumping in to mouth off at me (Grahf)... is making me pissed. GBA isn't archaic, but it's not where it could be. I'd have hoped that the bleeding edge of handhelds would pushed hardware further. Non-gaming oriented handhelds shouldn't be the gaming platforms of choice hardware-wise. You could probably emulate GBA quite well on some PocketPC's if you tried... You didn't used to be this far gone. You just sound angry right now. Take a walk and cool off ok? No, I'm going to sleep actually.. but enh. I'd like it if you'd quit acting like I only argue with you because I have some kind of grudge against you. You happen to be in a position that is naturally highly conflicting with mine and this comes up a lot. That's all. - Exo

September 9th, 2002	#20 (permalink)
Ninjaa Banned Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soviet Canuckistan Posts: 7,778	Something tells me that this thread is going to be locked with a message along the lines of "Looks like Exophase and Ninja have done it again." (bring back memories? ) But if this thread is still open tomorrow, i will continue this then. right now I am going home and going to sleep. And maybe I'll smoke my last cigarette. (I can't afford more).