Support NeoGAF

[SmokyDave]

But they're for completely different purposes. I already have home consoles to play on when i'm in my own home. If i'm actually playing on the go at all i just want to play something simple. It doesn't matter how many buttons you give a handheld, it will always be a watered down home console. I just don't want the same thing for both.

My point about the iphone is a lot of those games wouldn't exist without that simple control scheme and those are the games i love. So for me personally i can see how a simpler control scheme leading to better games.

Edit: If gaming was still limited to a dpad and 2 buttons (not that i'm actually advocating that) it would still be in 2D which would make it infinitely better than the prime games for me.

I guess we just want very different things from our handhelds. I want a watered down home console. I want the chance to play 'proper' console style games as well as simpler, quicker experiences (predominantly found on PSN or the eShop). I don't see why I should settle for one or the other when it's perfectly possible to have both.

I have an iPhone for playing quick, simple games in short bursts.

 

[zoukka]

I guess we just want very different things from our handhelds. I want a watered down home console. I want the chance to play 'proper' console style games as well as simpler, quicker experiences (predominantly found on PSN or the eShop). I don't see why I should settle for one or the other when it's perfectly possible to have both.

I have an iPhone for playing quick, simple games in short bursts.

We live amazing times because we now have choice. I would be pretty sad if Nintendo tried to copy Sony and Microsoft in everything and the choice would diminish (even though it already has to some degree).

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

This was pretty funny



You can't get games that have Nintendo levels of production values for 1 dollar.

What was pretty funny?

Nintendo levels of production values? If you want to go that route, then Vita games are also $40 and look at the production values there.

We live amazing times because we now have choice. I would be pretty sad if Nintendo tried to copy Sony and Microsoft in everything and the choice would diminish (even though it already has to some degree).

Aren't you the one saying the limitations are good?

 

[AdventureRacing]

May as well just play it on the PS2 now, you probably already own it too so it won't cost you a thing.

The point is that some people want to take their favorite console games to the bathroom with them, to work with them and on the subway with them.

I would argue that the market for that actually isn't all that big and it's a mistake targeting it. I'm more talking about my selfish wants though. I much prefer simple games on my handheld, a game like FFX is much more suited to home consoles and i'm just not interested in playing it on a handheld.

I guess we just want very different things from our handhelds. I want a watered down home console. I want the chance to play 'proper' console style games as well as simpler, quicker experiences (predominantly found on PSN or the eShop). I don't see why I should settle for one or the other when it's perfectly possible to have both.

I have an iPhone for playing quick, simple games in short bursts.

If i want to play a console i'll play a console. Handhelds are for a completely different purpose. I'm talking about for me personally. I don't want to play those sort of games so all the extra stuff doesn't nothing for me. A simpler control scheme encourages devs to make the sort of games i want. I know it's selfish but i'm ok with that.

 

[zoukka]

What was pretty funny?

You saying that for Vita a portable Final Fantasy would need to be a full fledged expensive project. And then straight after you are agreeing that Vita needs more games to succeed. You kinda put Vita's failure in a nutshell and reinforced my stance on why it's beneficial to have limited hardware sometimes.

Nintendo levels of production values? If you want to go that route, then Vita games are also $40 and look at the production values there.

There's no conflict here. You can't get games like Uncharted or Mario on smartphones.

Aren't you the one saying the limitations are good?

Eh you can't compare those ideas at all. The amount of available platforms and hardware limitations inside one platform.

 

[Femmeworth]

No, but it should have no analogs.

I can only assume you think touch controls work better for 3D movement on handhelds.

For your examples, I'm not sure what you are looking for? I already gave a few examples in a previous post where games imposed arbitary limitations on their design that were unusual or completely new to the genre and actually benefitted from those limitations (Metroid Prime and Resident Evil 4).

*scratches head* Doesn't that run counter to your point?

 

[Rubius]

No, but it should have no analogs.

Playing a 3D platformer with a DPad is like playing a RTS without a mouse.

 

[ugly]

Zoukka's got the idea.

For one, at the time it was an advancement over the previous iteration of the gameboy. The og gameboy cleaned up man. Ask a non-gamer what other handhelds were out during the time of the gameboy. Nintendo had a monopoly over that scene. They could do what they wanted pretty much xD

From a design standpoint, simplicity wins with a lot of people I think. Not that the general game-playing population will actively think about simplicity in design, but rather the effect of that design will increase people's enjoyment. Handhelds should be easy to play. Quick, simple, but engaging and deep at the same time. Look how well angry birds does. How many actions do you have to make in that game?

With fewer buttons, MORE game developers are thinking, how can we deliver a great experience while not cluttering the learning experience? It strips games down to a simple, approachable level. Designers can focus more on how to utilize what they have to create something fun. The games are streamlined by the very limitation on the hardware.

There is an awesome library of games for the machine. Zeldas, Marios, SRPGs, the works. None of them really feel gimped.* Metroid Fusion is one of my favourite games ever. Its grandaddy Super Metroid used two more buttons but Fusion, in terms of control, certainly does not feel worse or somehow neutered. The player character actually has new options in terms of maneuverability! You can hang onto ledges, and hang from ceiling rails. These actions don't even utilize the face buttons.

There is a certain art I think to making something amazing out of little. The og gameboy had TWO buttons. Two. Four shades of grey for the visuals. Link's Awakening is a masterpiece. Kid Dracula. Kirby in Dreamland 2. Donkey mother fucking Kong mother fucking '94. Daym.

I think it's a choice that worked well for them, that really did not hinder many games at all, and was easy for people to grasp. The gameboy advance was a total success right?

 

[Knux-Future]

It would be no more cramped than their current multi button handhelds.

Boom, I made a proper GBA.

Edit: Made it more gameboy like.

That wouldn't be fun to hold.

It "works" on the DS because you have the top screen to rest your fingers. and to accomodate the extra buttons...they had to be made smaller.

and there is is only so much bigger a handheld can get.

I'm just saying that at the time, they made the correct choice. Most of the games on the GBA didn't require the extra buttons.

The DS and on does.

as for the console ports versus handheld type games...I agree that I rather play console like games on the console. It's why I didn't finish Peace Walker. I just kept wishing I could play this on the big screen...didn't help that the controls sucked IMO.


but options is always good.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

You saying that for Vita a portable Final Fantasy would need to be a full fledged expensive project. And then straight after you are agreeing that Vita needs more games to succeed. You kinda put Vita's failure in a nutshell and reinforced my stance on why it's beneficial to have limited hardware sometimes.



There's no conflict here. You can't get games like Uncharted or Mario on smartphones.



Eh you can't compare those ideas at all. The amount of available platforms and hardware limitations inside one platform.

Saying that a Vita Final Fantasy game would be a big production is not in conflict with Vita needing more games.


The point was, that Nintendo's production values aren't as high as something like Uncharted and yet the price is the same.

Don't follow.

 

[SmokyDave]

We live amazing times because we now have choice. I would be pretty sad if Nintendo tried to copy Sony and Microsoft in everything and the choice would diminish (even though it already has to some degree).

They are already 'copying' in some ways. PSP has an analogue stick -> 3DS gets one. PSP had a digital store and downloadable games -> DSi appears. I betcha the successor to the 3DS gets a second analogue stick. These are all good things, mind you, and natural progressions for a handheld. Also, more inputs = more choice.

If i want to play a console i'll play a console. Handhelds are for a completely different purpose. I'm talking about for me personally. I don't want to play those sort of games so all the extra stuff doesn't nothing for me. A simpler control scheme encourages devs to make the sort of games i want. I know it's selfish but i'm ok with that.

As I said, we want different things from our handhelds. Difference is, my way we both get what we want. The last two handheld games I bought were Dead Or Alive 5+ (A console port) & Guacamelee (a 2D metroidvania). You can have your cake and eat it nowadays.

 

[Deleted member 74300]

So that's what Mario for the Saturn or PS1 would look like.

 

[Rubius]

That wouldn't be fun to hold.

It "works" on the DS because you have the top screen to rest your fingers. and to accomodate the extra buttons...they had to be made smaller.

and there is is only so much bigger a handheld can get.

I'm just saying that at the time, they made the correct choice. Most of the games on the GBA didn't require the extra buttons.

The DS and on does.

as for the console ports versus handheld type games...I agree that I rather play console like games on the console. It's why I didn't finish Peace Walker. I just kept wishing I could play this on the big screen...didn't help that the controls sucked IMO.


but options is always good.

Metroid Zero Mission and Fusion could have been better.

 

[JordanN]

That wouldn't be fun to hold.

It "works" on the DS because you have the top screen to rest your fingers. and to accomodate the extra buttons...they had to be made smaller.

and there is is only so much bigger a handheld can get.

I'm just saying that at the time, they made the correct choice. Most of the games on the GBA didn't require the extra buttons.

The DS and on does.

as for the console ports versus handheld type games...I agree that I rather play console like games on the console. It's why I didn't finish Peace Walker. I just kept wishing I could play this on the big screen...didn't help that the controls sucked IMO.


but options is always good.

I was too lazy to work on ergonomics. But if I did, I would make the top part taller and protrude the sides.

It would still be the GBA minus the gimp.

And the games didn't require the extra buttons because they were forced into it. But franchises on it that did exist elsewhere and used other buttons would no doubt have benefited.

 

[zoukka]

Saying that a Vita Final Fantasy game would be a big production is not in conflict with Vita needing more games.

It's in direct correlation in why it's not being made at all.

The point was, that Nintendo's production values aren't as high as something like Uncharted and yet the price is the same.

So uh games should be priced based on their budget now? And I'm pretty damn sure a game like 3D Land cost a lot to make.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

That wouldn't be fun to hold.

It "works" on the DS because you have the top screen to rest your fingers. and to accomodate the extra buttons...they had to be made smaller.

and there is is only so much bigger a handheld can get.

I'm just saying that at the time, they made the correct choice. Most of the games on the GBA didn't require the extra buttons.

The DS and on does.

as for the console ports versus handheld type games...I agree that I rather play console like games on the console. It's why I didn't finish Peace Walker. I just kept wishing I could play this on the big screen...didn't help that the controls sucked IMO.


but options is always good.

What kind of logic is this?

Most games designed for the GBA obviously weren't designed with 4 face buttons so of course they didn't NEED them.

Most games designed for the DS were designed with four face buttons and so they needed them.

If the GBA had been given 4 four face buttons, guess what would have happened?

So uh games should be priced based on their budget now? And I'm pretty damn sure a game like 3D Land cost a lot to make.

You are the one who brought up Nintendo production values, not me. You want to talk about Nintendo production values in relation to $1 games but you don't want to play anymore when we start comparing them to games on the Vita.

What I am saying is that $40 is approaching console game territory and Nintendo making "handheld friendly" chopped up games won't cut it at that price. Not when others are selling handheld friendly games for $1.

 

[zoukka]

Difference is, my way we both get what we want.

No, the Vita still remains as an undesireable platform for me despite its wealth of "choices" built into it. They have not helped it to gather games I would like to play on it.

 

[AdventureRacing]

As I said, we want different things from our handhelds. Difference is, my way we both get what we want. The last two handheld games I bought were Dead Or Alive 5+ (A console port) & Guacamelee (a 2D metroidvania). You can have your cake and eat it nowadays.

Except we have seen that less and less developers are producing the types of simple games that i like. With what i'm saying we both get what we want, there is room for more than one handheld on the market. For example there is the vita for home console experiences and smartphones for more simple games. The limitation of the iphone has led to so many simple games being made that otherwise probably wouldn't have.

In the end i'm not talking about something that is likely to happen or ever should happen. I'm just saying that a handheld with very limited control schemes would probably be ideal for me.

No, the Vita still remains as an undesireable platform for me despite its wealth of "choices" built into it. They have not helped it to gather games I would like to play on it.

Pretty much this. The vita can play the games i want and make them look pretty damn beautiful at that. There won't be many of them made though.

 

[ugly]

What kind of logic is this?

Most games designed for the GBA obviously weren't designed with 4 face buttons so of course they didn't NEED them.

Most games designed for the DS were designed with four face buttons and so they needed them.

If the GBA had been given 4 four face buttons, guess what would have happened?

I think you're exactly right. They didn't need them because they weren't designed for it... And they ruled! Not that modern handhelds don't benefit from more buttons and input styles cuz there is a ton of great games out there now. But it was just a design choice and I think it worked well. Another factor to consider, despite the Snes having more buttons, is that games are on gruntier machinery now too, so having more buttons is understandable and necessary for 3d games and stuff too! WE'RE ALL RIGHT YAAAYYY

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

No, the Vita still remains as an undesireable platform for me despite its wealth of "choices" built into it. They have not helped it to gather games I would like to play on it.

The Vita is perfectly capable of running chopped up handheld friendly games. No developer HAS to use all those options just because they are there.

 

[Knux-Future]

Metroid Zero Mission and Fusion could have been better.

You can't just take the SNES controller and smack a screen on it.

I was too lazy to work on ergonomics. But if I did, I would make the top part taller and protrude the sides.

It would still be the GBA minus the gimp.

And the games didn't require the extra buttons because they were forced into it. But franchises on it that did exist elsewhere and used other buttons would no doubt have benefited.

Go hold a DS as if the top screen isn't there. It sucks. Of course they could have made it bigger or wider I guess.

What kind of logic is this?

Most games designed for the GBA obviously weren't designed with 4 face buttons so of course they didn't NEED them.

Most games designed for the DS were designed with four face buttons and so they needed them.

If the GBA had been given 4 four face buttons, guess what would have happened?

I miswrote that.

I'm saying that at the time the type of games that were on portables did not require the extra buttons. Hence it did not have things like analogs because there wouldn't be many 3d games on the system (there were a few IIRC).

I'm just saying that at the time of it's release, it worked because that was the standard so to speak. The idea back then was that these were simple machines for everyone. So anybody could pick up and play it.

Ever hand a modern day controller to an older person? It blows their goddam minds. Nowadays the handheld market has more console like games and the audience is more or less used to the extra buttons.

Basically, the GBA's design was a product of it's time....for better or for worse.

We have the benefit of looking at it with what we know now.

The Vita is perfectly capable of running chopped up handheld friendly games. No developer HAS to use all those options just because they are there.

Not so fast. People would get mad if a Vita game didn't use most of it's features. I've seen reviews were a game got hit for not using the touch screen or pad.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Another factor to consider, despite the Snes having more buttons, is that games are on gruntier machinery now too, so having more buttons is understandable and necessary for 3d games and stuff too! WE'RE ALL RIGHT YAAAYYY

It's been established that the GBA was more powerful than the SNES.

I miswrote that.

I'm saying that at the time the type of games that were on portables did not require the extra buttons. Hence it did not have things like analogs because there wouldn't be many 3d games on the system (there were a few IIRC).

I'm just saying that at the time of it's release, it worked because that was the standard so to speak. The idea back then was that these were simple machines for everyone. So anybody could pick up and play it.

Ever hand a modern day controller to an older person? It blows their goddam minds. Nowadays the handheld market has more console like games and the audience is more or less used to the extra buttons.

Basically, the GBA's design was a product of it's time....for better or for worse.

We have the benefit of looking at it with what we know now.

Uh, all we are talking about here is adding X and Y buttons to the GBA. We aren't talking about adding analog sticks and analog triggers or anything else, just two extra buttons.

Now, do you think an SNES controller was too complicated in 2001?

Think about it, in 2001 we had been through the SNES, PS1, N64 and I think the PS2 was already out.

 

[ugly]

The Vita is perfectly capable of running chopped up handheld friendly games. No developer HAS to use all those options just because they are there.

It always seems a little awkward when they don't to me. Almost as if you're playing gba games on a ds haha. Like the system has gone underutilized and the game wasnt thought out strongly. Even if the button brings up a menu or something, that immediately changes the streamlined nature of a simple game. I suppose you could always double map the face buttons but that feels dumb too haha.

 

[ugly]

It's been established that the GBA was more powerful than the SNES.

That's why I say despite. I dunno. The level of power gba had, regardless of Snes just seems more friendly to simpler games. It was a weak argument

Double post, my bad.

 

[crinale]

I remember hearing they did it intentionally so it wouldn't just turn into an SNES port machine.

So that worked out well.

That's what I heard also (IIRC it was from Yamauchi, not Iwata). However we never know their true intentions were (maybe cost effectiveness?)

It is kinda ironic that later on Nintendo itself have done SNES ports (and suffered from button and resolution differences) later on. And those ports sold quite well too.

 

[SmokyDave]

No, the Vita still remains as an undesireable platform for me despite its wealth of "choices" built into it. They have not helped it to gather games I would like to play on it.

The inputs haven't hindered it either. At no point am I suggesting that the Vita is an enticing platform for you, it clearly isn't. I'm just saying that having a full complement of buttons and sticks is better than not having them.

Except we have seen that less and less developers are producing the types of simple games that i like. With what i'm saying we both get what we want, there is room for more than one handheld on the market. For example there is the vita for home console experiences and smartphones for more simple games. The limitation of the iphone has led to so many simple games being made that otherwise probably wouldn't have.

In the end i'm not talking about something that is likely to happen or ever should happen. I'm just saying that a handheld with very limited control schemes would probably be ideal for me.

It sounds like neither the 3DS nor the Vita offer what you're looking for, given that they are both host to very similar games (both retail and digital). I don't think that inputs are necessarily responsible for the changing landscape of portable games though, I think it's more that portable technology has advanced to the point where more complex games are possible and digital stores exist for the smaller, simpler titles.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

That's why I say despite. I dunno. The level of power gba had, regardless of Snes just seems more friendly to simpler games. It was a weak argument

Double post, my bad.

I think two extra buttons, that by 2001 everyone was accustomed to, wouldn't have prevented simplicity. In fact, it's possible that the missing two buttons made things more complex when one button had to do two things.

 

[ugly]

I think two extra buttons, that by 2001 everyone was accustomed to, wouldn't have prevented simplicity. In fact, it's possible that the missing two buttons made things more complex when one button had to do two things.

Yeah that is a good point! But I still think it would have been countered by game designers acknowledging that you had to be careful with how you use the buttons. More buttons would definitely NOT have been a bad thing I think, but its the limitation that gave birth to alot of the quirky and neat titles on the system. I think the system did perfectly well with the exception of maybe fighting games.

I think moreso at the time than now, handhelds were much more stripped back than the consoles, and especially in the minds of the consumers at the time. The gba was during the time of the gamecube, like, you simply weren't gonna get that same kind of experience on the handheld. (As opposed to now where we have Monster Hunter on WiiU and 3ds) I wonder if maybe people expected a simpler experience, your pokemon and 2d marios... I dunno. haha. The fact is the system was a success. So its an interesting question.

 

[zoukka]

You are the one who brought up Nintendo production values, not me. You want to talk about Nintendo production values in relation to $1 games but you don't want to play anymore when we start comparing them to games on the Vita.

What I am saying is that $40 is approaching console game territory and Nintendo making "handheld friendly" chopped up games won't cut it at that price. Not when others are selling handheld friendly games for $1.

You are the one using this "chopped up" term. I don't agree on it at all. I'll gladly pay 40 units of money for a well designed game. I dont' give a shit if the game doesn't have mocapped cinematics and famous voice actors :b

The Vita is perfectly capable of running chopped up handheld friendly games. No developer HAS to use all those options just because they are there.

So where are the games? I argue that the Vita lacks focus and that developers have pressure to deliver home console like experiences on it.

The inputs haven't hindered it either. At no point am I suggesting that the Vita is an enticing platform for you, it clearly isn't. I'm just saying that having a full complement of buttons and sticks is better than not having them.

It sounds like neither the 3DS nor the Vita offer what you're looking for, given that they are both host to very similar games (both retail and digital). I don't think that inputs are necessarily responsible for the changing landscape of portable games though, I think it's more that portable technology has advanced to the point where more complex games are possible and digital stores exist for the smaller, simpler titles.

Oh but I can't fully agree because I do believe that a simple platform would gather more handheld suitable games on it and that a more robust and capable platform would not. On paper it shouldn't be like this, but the reality is different.

And you are right about 3DS as well. It's vastly inferior to DSlite.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Yeah that is a good point! But I still think it would have been countered by game designers acknowledging that you had to be careful with how you use the buttons. More buttons would definitely NOT have been a bad thing I think, but its the limitation that gave birth to alot of the quirky and neat titles on the system. I think the system did perfectly well with the exception of maybe fighting games.

I think moreso at the time than now, handhelds were much more stripped back than the consoles, and especially in the minds of the consumers at the time. The gba was during the time of the gamecube, like, you simply weren't gonna get that same kind of experience on the handheld. (As opposed to now where we have Monster Hunter on WiiU and 3ds) I wonder if maybe people expected a simpler experience, your pokemon and 2d marios... I dunno. haha. The fact is the system was a success. So its an interesting question.

Speaking for myself, I owned a GBA back in the Gamecube days but I only used it to hook it up to the Gamecube when I played Wind Waker. I still use it everytime I play Wind Waker. Later I used it to play SNES ports like Final Fantasy VI Advance and the two Breath of Fire games. I still consider the original games on the SNES to be superior but even then I wanted console games on the go and didn't care at all about handheld friendly games.

It was only when the DS got Chrono Trigger that I started looking at handhelds more seriously. Now, I play on handhelds more than console but it isn't for the chopped up crap like Sticker Star.

I think that handhelds are becoming more attractive because they can now replace consoles whereas before they could not. Before you would have to give up your PS2 or your Gamecube controller for an NES controller. Now the Vita is more like a PS3 controller and the 3DS is similar too, only missing a second analog stick.

 

[feint_ruled]

Try one button! The UK home computing sector in the 80s and 90s somehow managed to standardise on the single button joystick. So for example, the Amiga version of Mortal Kombat used a single button. It controlled just as bad as you imagine.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

You are the one using this "chopped up" term. I don't agree on it at all. I'll gladly pay 40 units of money for a well designed game. I dont' give a shit if the game doesn't have mocapped cinematics and famous voice actors :b



So where are the games? I argue that the Vita lacks focus and that developers have pressure to deliver home console like experiences on it.





And you are right about 3DS as well. It's vastly inferior to DSlite.

Let me give an example of chopped up.

Sticker Star vs Thousand Year Door. Sticker Star is chopped up into levels, RPG elements removed and story non existent because Miyamoto wanted to make it more handheld friendly. Has nothing to do with cinematics. Luigi's Mansion 2 is also chopped up into a mission structure instead of an open world experience. I don't believe it's a hardware limitation either.

Just because I say Vita needs more games doesn't mean I am looking over the shoulders of developers. I can't answer that question.

Opinions will vary but this one is way out in left field. I guess it is true that DS Lite didn't scratch it's own top screen though.

 

[ugly]

Yeah totally they are much more viable now. It is a totally different situation right now. There are way more advanced games and gamed that are longer, and often far far deeper. But you know I really don't consider what the gba had to offer bad, in fact they are great games. I played the crap out of my gba when I was younger and I even still play my gameboy pocket now and I can recognise that something like Donkey Kong just does not have the depth some modern statisticsy RPG would have. But I can appreciate it for the fact that it takes its relatively simple ideas and runs with them and changes them as they game continues. It stays fresh and fun. And for a huge number of people, especially kids, that was all that mattered I think! The market has changed but at the time I think, with phones not being so huge, gameboys were the go to for fun games haha. Every kid and his dog had one. And thats partially why I think the two button scheme worked as well. I'm rather tired so sorry if that didnt reaaally connect to what you said but hey, food for thought

Oh, damn. Conversations in real life are much more effective for making sure people know who you're talking to haha!
That was in reply to:

Speaking for myself, I owned a GBA back in the Gamecube days but I only used it to hook it up to the Gamecube when I played Wind Waker. I still use it everytime I play Wind Waker. Later I used it to play SNES ports like Final Fantasy VI Advance and the two Breath of Fire games. I still consider the original games on the SNES to be superior but even then I wanted console games on the go and didn't care at all about handheld friendly games.

It was only when the DS got Chrono Trigger that I started looking at handhelds more seriously. Now, I play on handhelds more than console but it isn't for the chopped up crap like Sticker Star.

I think that handhelds are becoming more attractive because they can now replace consoles whereas before they could not. Before you would have to give up your PS2 or your Gamecube controller for an NES controller. Now the Vita is more like a PS3 controller and the 3DS is similar too, only missing a second analog stick.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Yeah totally they are much more viable now. It is a totally different situation right now. There are way more advanced games and gamed that are longer, and often far far deeper. But you know I really don't consider what the gba had to offer bad, in fact they are great games. I played the crap out of my gba when I was younger and I even still play my gameboy pocket now and I can recognise that something like Donkey Kong just does not have the depth some modern statisticsy RPG would have. But I can appreciate it for the fact that it takes its relatively simple ideas and runs with them and changes them as they game continues. It stays fresh and fun. And for a huge number of people, especially kids, that was all that mattered I think! The market has changed but at the time I think, with phones not being so huge, gameboys were the go to for fun games haha. Every kid and his dog had one. And thats partially why I think the two button scheme worked as well. I'm rather tired so sorry if that didnt reaaally connect to what you said but hey, food for thought

Oh, damn. Conversations in real life are much more effective for making sure people know who you're talking to haha!
That was in reply to:

It's all good, I just think the two button thing held handhelds back and who knows, if the PSP hadn't existed, we may still be using two face buttons. As handhelds get more advanced (more like console controllers) , more people play on them. I think that is what people wanted all along, to get the console quality out of a handheld. Atleast, that's what I wanted. When I play Final Fantasy VII or VIII now, it's never on a console, it's on the PSP or the PC (because of the superior load times).

Tetris was not as cool in black and white when I could just play it in color on the NES, for example.

 

[ugly]

Yea, that is probably what a large portion of the demographic want (but I couldn't really say haha, I don't know enough) but I certainly am not one of those people. I love handheld games, but I find it hard to get immersed in such a tiny screen. I want my Metal Gear Solid on a big tv!

I doubt the gba held handhelds back per se. No matter what, the psp came along and had 4 buttons and that is that. The gba having 4 buttons I don't think would have greatly affected where handheld gaming has ended up.

Metal Gear Solid is not as cool with shitty speakers and a small screen when I can just play it big and loud with a sturdy controller that I can bash for example

 

[The Mana Legend]

It doesn't matter how many goddamn buttons a system has, it's how effective the developer is at using them that matters.

 

[BGBW]

Two buttons meant the Micro would be a possibility and for that we should all be grateful.

Amen.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Yea, that is probably what a large portion of the demographic want (but I couldn't really say haha, I don't know enough) but I certainly am not one of those people. I love handheld games, but I find it hard to get immersed in such a tiny screen. I want my Metal Gear Solid on a big tv!

I doubt the gba held handhelds back per se. No matter what, the psp came along and had 4 buttons and that is that. The gba having 4 buttons I don't think would have greatly affected where handheld gaming has ended up.

Metal Gear Solid is not as cool with shitty speakers and a small screen when I can just play it big and loud with a sturdy controller that I can bash for example

Oh, it's quite true that a tiny screen and crappy speakers are a down side. I remember playing Final Fantasy VI Advance and realizing that this was the superior version of the game (better script, more content) but I still preferred playing it on the SNES because of the bigger screen and the better sound quality.

Of course, GBA had only one speaker and it sounded horrible. Since then all handhelds have atleast had stereo sound.

It doesn't matter how many goddamn buttons a system has, it's how effective the developer is at using them that matters.

Pretty sure most everything since the SNES has had four face buttons. Everyone seems to agree that four face buttons is ideal.

 

[thomasmahler]

It was a stupid limitation - and judging from the DS's popularity, I don't think people were all that confused by the 4 face buttons. It definitely made all the SNES Remakes kinda shitty when their controls were dependent on all 4 buttons.

 

[Ashodin]

The first year of the GBA was a good year.

 

[Cheerilee]

I always found it strange that Nintendo made a handheld that was more powerful than SNES (a SNES port machine, no less) and only included A and B buttons instead of the ABXY configuration we're used to. It made for some pretty awkward controls in some games like the Super Mario World and A Link to the Past ports, and arguably simplified/worsened a bunch of games simply because they didn't have access to 2 more buttons.

Was there ever a reason why they did this?

I'm pretty sure the answer is "Shigeru Miyamoto".

Gunpei Yokoi invented the NES controller, and it was great. He invented the SNES controller, and it was great. But Miyamoto had a major hand in the N64 controller, because it was basically being arranged around Mario 64.

The Virtual Boy, as you may recall, had twin D-pads, triggers, and four face buttons (a modest two for each thumb). I'm sure Yokoi would have given it twin analogs instead of D-pads if he had the budget (although he would've given the display more colors first), and left to himself, would've probably released a handheld with twin analog as soon as such a thing became feasible.

But then Miyamoto became the god of Nintendo, and Gunpei Yokoi was fired. And Miyamoto started talking about how controls had gotten too complicated (no doubt influenced by the N64 controller which was made to suit his own game), that controllers were scaring away the old people like himself, and that they needed to be simplified drastically. His concept for the GameCube controller was a freaking one button controller, with lesser so-called "satellite buttons" attached because people mocked his idea of a "win button". With the Wii Remote, he used waggle as an excuse to toss pretty much everything except for a D-pad and two buttons. At first, he didn't even want the analog nunchuck, that was just there to satisfy third parties and Retro.

The GameBoy Advance was obviously based on the SNES controller. Somebody decided that the SNES controller had too many buttons, and all signs point to that somebody being Miyamoto.

I don't believe the SNES controller had too many buttons. I think the GBA should have had four face buttons. And they should have been the four colors of the Super Famicom controller's face buttons.

 

[thomasmahler]

The first year of the GBA was a good year.

No, it wasn't. The Display was complete shit and games like Circle of the Moon didn't really cut it yet.

GBA became awesome with the SP and games like Aria of Sorrow, Metroid Fusion and finally being able to see something while playing Advance Wars. That system had some glorious games.

 

[BGBW]

People seem to have forgotten that the NeoGeo Pocket Color came out around this time and that only had two face buttons. :/

 

[KiNeSiS]

what

Analogs shouldn't be on handhelds at all

You are out of your fucking mind!

 

[ugly]

No, it wasn't. The Display was complete shit and games like Circle of the Moon didn't really cut it yet.

GBA became awesome with the SP and games like Aria of Sorrow, Metroid Fusion and finally being able to see something while playing Advance Wars. That system had some glorious games.

Glorious games that utilized two face buttons extremely tactfully. Advance Wars lost nothing from missing out on two extrs buttons.

 

[FaceDa]

Simplicity. To encourage developers keeping controls simple and easy to maintain while gaming in unusual locations and positions.

It's a beautiful design philosophy.

So what do you think about iOS games that only use one "button", with no dpad?

 

[DonMigs85]

Three-dimensional DS games are a visual atrocity.

Gameboy Advance has two buttons to differentiate itself as a handheld and to accommodate a more compact size. The idea was always that it would offer unique experiences that fit a mobile gaming device.

You should see Dementium, Juiced 2 and C.O.P. first. They blow away just about any 3D N64 title. Plus, while it lacked texture filtering the DS did have "free" edge AA and most games ran at 60FPS.

 

[Desiato]

Never have I thought while playing GBA "I wish this system had more buttons". Never.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Only game I think needed it was DooM. And that was a shitty port anyway.

 

[ugly]

Never have I thought while playing GBA "I wish this system had more buttons". Never.

YES! UNGH YES EXACTLY UNGGHH FF
The great games on this thing were designed by the fantastic ass developers who understood you gotta roll wit dat shit u no!!!
splplfpfd