I ignored it because it's wrong. One game playable on two differing hardware isn't like two games playable on two differing hardware. At all.It is like it "at all", you ignored my response that explains why.
I guess I'll repeat myself since it didn't sink in the first time. The expectation initially was all games playable across all Game Boys. When that changed the branding changed to make sure consumers knew as much (Only on GBC). I'm not sure why you're harping on the back of the box, games had identical insignia for compatibility with Game Boy AND Game Boy Color on the back of every box. It wasn't on the front because the standard was always playable on old hardware, the exception was not and hence why that branding was stuck on the front for Color exclusive titles when they started showing up six months after the system launched.If the understanding was that the games would still be playable on every game boy they wouldn't have included that blurb in the back. And why wasn't Game Boy Pocket on the front of every box after it released? Because it was a revision, while the GBC was a new system.
Also, the GBC was not unique. The Neo Geo Pocket/Color and Wonderswan/Color also had cross-compatible games and exclusives. They were both successors as well.
Most NGPC games were cross-compatible while only some WSC games were. Neither had palettes preprogrammed into their firmware for old games like GBC did. NGP must've had the shortest lifespan in history though with it's "successor" launching 5 months later.
Nintendo lumps GB and GBC together in all their official documentation. Financials, PR, development. Just as they do DS and DSi. If you consider one set a successor you'd have to consider the other one a successor as well.How they lump them together in their financials doesn't mean much at all. That's for investors, not consumers. Didn't sony start lumping PSP and Vita together for awhile?
Sony started combining product lines to mask Vita's pathetic sales, but that has literally no bearing on this. Sony isn't Nintendo. Nintendo doesn't combine successors but the do combine revisions. Even half step ones like GBC or DSi.
Of course there was no pattern, nothing like that degree of forwards compatibility had ever been done for specific legacy software before, or since really. The closest thing might be the customized emulation Microsoft did on a selection of Xbox games for playing on 360. The only pattern I presented anywhere was how Nintendo groups revisions and doesn't group successors. Well I also pointed out how Nintendo released almost no GBC exclusive games for a year until the market had made it a raging success. I guess they released way more than four GBA exclusive games it's first year.The GBA and SP were to help show you these supposed great lengths Nintendo went to upgrade OG Game Boy games doesn't somehow make the GBC a revision. Clearly there's no pattern.
But really Iet's look at the most obvious thing here, please explain what reason Nintendo had for beefing up the GBC specs so much outside making more graphically demanding games that of course the OG GB wouldn't be able to run. This hardware was proooobably designed before the system was released and had such a smashing success.
Edit: I think I should point out I'm pretty happy with this new announcement, since I think I remember you said you were too awhile ago, correct me if I'm wrong! Most of all I like that they're going back and getting 3D right instead of ditching it. I was worried after the 2DS. It really made a difference in Mar 3D Land even if it felt like I had to keep perfectly still.
GBC specs were beefed up for color output basically. They needed more horsepower to display more than 4 shades of grey on those new color screens. Just as DSi was beefed up for camera and online functionality (digital game store, web browser, etc). New 3DS seems like the odd one out, there's no real discernible addition here demanding an increase in horsepower or memory. Maybe the eye-tracking for improved 3D but even DSi could manage something like that with games. It really seems like the increase is for improving the general experience of what 3DS already does, not doing something new it can't.