BoneSnapDeez wrote:^ The fact that the GBC had a large library of exclusive games incompatible with older harder makes it a proper successor, in my opinion.
If it has exclusive games I woul say its a new console/successor since there are games that can only be played on this specific device.
Reprise wrote:
Unless you're just saying what your personal reason for getting a Switch would be.
Edit: Also, even if you're playing portably, you can still stick it in tabletop mode and use the pro controller that way.
I am saying exactly this, purchasing the switch would be for its portability otherwise it makes more sense to get a PS4 unless you are into the Nintendo games which I am not.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:^ The fact that the GBC had a large library of exclusive games incompatible with older harder makes it a proper successor, in my opinion.
If it has exclusive games I woul say its a new console/successor since there are games that can only be played on this specific device.
Would you consider the DSi to be Nintendo's fifth distinct handheld separate from DS? Would the New 3DS be a distinct seventh handheld separate from the 3DS? Both have exclusive games that can't be played on the older hardware. I'd say, however, that like Bone said, the quantity of exclusive games rather than the mere existence of exclusive games make the biggest difference between a hardware revision and a proper successor. The DSi and New 3DS have games that can't be played on a base DS or 3DS, respectively, but those are in extremely small numbers, so I'd call those hardware revisions or half-step upgrades whereas the Game Boy Color had an enormous number of games - more than half its library IIRC - cannot be played on a regular Game Boy, making the Game Boy Color a true successor rather than half-step in my opinion.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:^ The fact that the GBC had a large library of exclusive games incompatible with older harder makes it a proper successor, in my opinion.
If it has exclusive games I woul say its a new console/successor since there are games that can only be played on this specific device.
Would you consider the DSi to be Nintendo's fifth distinct handheld separate from DS? Would the New 3DS be a distinct seventh handheld separate from the 3DS? Both have exclusive games that can't be played on the older hardware. I'd say, however, that like Bone said, the quantity of exclusive games rather than the mere existence of exclusive games make the biggest difference between a hardware revision and a proper successor. The DSi and New 3DS have games that can't be played on a base DS or 3DS, respectively, but those are in extremely small numbers, so I'd call those hardware revisions or half-step upgrades whereas the Game Boy Color had an enormous number of games - more than half its library IIRC - cannot be played on a regular Game Boy, making the Game Boy Color a true successor rather than half-step in my opinion.
There were over 200 games playable on DSi that were not playable on the original DS or DS Lite.
Whilst I much prefer physical too, I feel like to exclude the library like that is to pick and choose your conditions arbritarily. The Game Boy Color was a power boosted Game Boy with new features and a library of games that was sometimes playable on the older system, and sometimes exclusives to the upgraded system.
The DSi was a power boosted DS with new features and a library of games that was sometimes playable on the older system, and sometimes exclusive to the newer system.
The GBA was not the same because no games that were designed for GBA worked on a Game Boy Color or Game Boy.
I feel the only real difference between the two really is that Nintendo changed the boxes on GBC games to say 'Game Boy Color' even when they were GB compatible, whereas they kept the 'Nintendo DS' branding for games released during the DSi era. This is probably because the Game Boy was 9 years old at the time though, and they really wanted to push this as something new.
alienjesus wrote:
The DSi was a power boosted DS with new features and a library of games that was sometimes playable on the older system, and sometimes exclusive to the newer system.
As mentioned, there are very few actual cartridges released that are DSi only (I think three in the U.S.) - and those actually did have a different logo on the box.
The volume of games exclusive to the DSi amounts more to that one of the features added was internal storage, enabling downloaded software beyond demos in RAM. To me, it makes it more like an accessory that's required for some games, a la Kinect or PSMove (or maybe CD add ons, for that matter), making it more like an expansion on the DS than a replacement. If you don't want to play downloads, the difference is very marginal.
SNK games have been selling really well on Switch. Double the sale of the PS4 versions. One of the reasons SNK 40th Collection is Switch Exclusive and SNK Tag Team Heroines is now Physical only on Switch. Digital on PS4. If SNK could they would have canceled the PS4 version. SNK entered a deal with Nintendo and NIS/SNK are not on great terms with Sony atm. Switch is what the Neo Geo X wanted to be.
I personally don't think the DSi or New 3DS really hit the threshold to say they're a next generation of systems. They're souped-up variants, much like the PlayStation 4 Pro, but still very much in the same ballpark. Maybe the SuperGrafx is a good retro comparison, dunno.
I guess the real question with the Color is that, outside of the CPU and memory upgrades, does the new PPU with the expanded color palette make it a "new" system? I think it does, but I admit my dividing line is pretty arbitrary. The DSi has the CPU and memory upgrades (quite similar, actually), but the GPU is identical. Same deal with the "New" line, where you get a bump in clock speeds and memory, but the GPU is unchanged again. (Interestingly, though, the New line actually brings pretty significant upgrades, apparently going from dual- to quad-core and a big jump in clock frequency from 268 MHz to 804 MHz. Too bad so few games take advantage of it, outside of Virtual Console emulation. Or maybe I should say thankfully, since the lack of games that really use it have kept me from making the same mistake I made with the DSi.)
So... yeah, it's a tricky subject. I can see both arguments.
Sarge wrote:Maybe the SuperGrafx is a good retro comparison, dunno.
That's an interesting one I hadn't thought about. I always thought of the SuperGrafx as a successor console to the TurboGrafx-16 (albeit a miserable commercial failure of one), but I honestly don't know enough about the console to feel confident in that opinion.
