Support NeoGAF

[D.Lo]

You're really making this argument on a slight marketing distinction. Plenty of games took advantage of DSi and New 3DS (especially the New 3DS, like pretty much all new releases at this point can leverage it to some degree), but only the exclusives got prominently marketed as such. The only real difference is that with GBC the enhanced games got the GBC branding instead of the GB branding. It's a difference in presentation but not content.

That is absolutely true of cross gen GBC games, which had GBC on the box, but the cart said 'Nintendo Game Boy' at the top, etched in the plastic. Very much like N3DS enhanced games, the only difference is the box does not say N3DS, just 3DS.

Game Boy Color exclusives (aka the majority of games that came in a box that said GBC), however, came in an entirely new cart shape and colour, with Game Boy Color etched in the plastic on the top, and they did not even fit in an old GB. There is no N3DS equivalent, Xenoblade is the same cart shape (and 3DS games don't have 3DS etched on the cart, just a label)

While I think it is much more borderline, I think there is an argument that DSi and N3DS are distinct platforms. But what I'm arguing is that their more iffy claim to be separate platforms should not colour the Game Boy Color's claim. And I think this is why some people's thinking gets in a twist: DSi and N3DS are similar to GBC in some ways, and it can be argued that DSi and N3DS are not new platforms or generations, but what does that have to do with GBC's case?

Basically, Game Boy Color has some parallels with DSi and N3DS. But the weaker argument for DSi being a new generation doesn't therefore back-apply to GBC not being a new platform because of those parallels. N3DS not being a new platform/generation does not prove GBC was not a new platform/generation just because they have some things in common. Doing that is just trying to line things up more neatly than they acually are.

 

[Putosaure]

You're really making this argument on a slight marketing distinction. Plenty of games took advantage of DSi and New 3DS (especially the New 3DS, like pretty much all new releases at this point can leverage it to some degree), but only the exclusives got prominently marketed as such. The only real difference is that with GBC the enhanced games got the GBC branding instead of the GB branding. It's a difference in presentation but not content.

Despite the fact that they can't physically be played on an OG Game Boy. You could launch them with a GB Pocket, but had to deal with glorious splash screen (great topic about it : http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1291478).
I dont understand people here arguing that most of the game were playable on monochrome GB. More than 2/3 of my GBC library is not!

The 3DS => N3DS is nothing in comparison as basically just ONE retail game is N3DS exclusive. ONE. Then you have games that performs better, and eShop exclusive small games, mostly because of Unity. And SNES VC. But only one retail game compared to the hundreds of GBC only games ?

 

[flak57]

Basically, Game Boy Color has some parallels with DSi and N3DS. But the weaker argument for N3DS being a new generation doesn't therefore back-apply to GBC not being a new platform because of those parallels. N3DS not being a new platform/generation does not prove GBC was not a new platform/generation just because they have some things in common. Doing that is just trying to line things up more neatly than they acually are.

Yeah, I mean for fuck's sake let's keep things in perspective. Here are some 3rd party franchises that GBC had handheld exclusives in -

Resident Evil
Mega Man
Harvest Moon
Rayman
Tomb Raider
Tony Hawk
Metal Gear Solid
Dragon Quest
Street Fighter
Duke Nukem
Madden

 

[Celine]

Because while with slightly different hardware than the original GB, Game Boy Color is the same architecture as the GB which make it just a revision.
It may have software compatible only with the Color revision but it's part of the same family.
Same for other handhelds that had revisions with boosted specs like WonderSwan (WSC), DS (DSi) or 3DS (N3DS).

Which is nonsense.

Only because you disagree doesn't mean it's nonsense.

 

[Madao]

How about we look at what an actual developer said on the topic?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=128057318&postcount=3930

interesting.

going by this, it was pretty much Nintendo's decision and focus on not splitting the userbase that made the DSi (and New 3DS) go the way they went with their exclusives vs how the GBC games went.

makes sense since people having to ditch their blocky and massive and pretty old sub $80 GB for a small and colored GBC wasn't such a bad proposition vs having to ditch their relatively fresh $150-$200 3DS for a New 3DS.

if 90s Nintendo was in charge of the DSi and New 3DS, i bet we'd have started to see a ton of retail exclusives after the second year but these days that wouldn't fly (not even Sony and MS would pull that. see how they keep pushing that they won't make PS4 Pro or XB1X exclusives). i'm now expecting a Switch revision with upgraded specs that only serve to reduce battery usage or something else extra and they won't allow for enhanced graphics until they make a sucessor.

 

[Lucumo]

Besides color, was GBC really that different?

Absolutely, which is the reason why pretty much everyone who owned a GB that I know switched to the GBC.

 

[Dryk]

For me, it boils down to "no one drew a distinction when I was 8 and playing Pokemon so I still don't." Garbage reason TBH.

Generations are ultimately defined by consensus, and a large part of that is experience. If the GBC came out and people felt that the increase of power was insufficient to distinguish it then it's part of the same generation.

 

[ascii42]

The power jump between the GB/GBC is about the same as DS/DSi or 3DS/n3DS

Or GameCube/Wii

 

[beril]

It's a revision that got a longer than expected shelf life

If you were to see it as a new console it would be the saddest excuse for a new generation ever. Things like higher clock speed and more RAM mean very little compared to actual architectural upgrades for a system like this (and remember we're talking about an additional 32kb of RAM in 1998, almost 10 years after the original GB). It's still fundamentally the same hardware in almost every single way

 

[D.Lo]

It's a revision that got a longer than expected shelf life

If you were to see it as a new console it would be the saddest excuse for a new generation ever. Things like higher clock speed and more RAM mean very little compared to actual architectural upgrades for a system like this (and remember we're talking about an additional 32kb of RAM in 1998, almost 10 years after the original GB). It's still fundamentally the same hardware in almost every single way

Read the thread, this has been gone over. In many ways it was more of an upgrade than Wii was over Gamecube. Was the Wii not a new generation then, just because it's a small power bump? No, because the Wii added important new features that were not computing-power based too, and had new branding and big name exclusive games, just like GBC did, despite both being architecturally nearly identical to their predecessors.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

So apparently, despite having over 400 exclusive games, the GBC is not a new generation to some because there were cross-gen games released for it that also worked on the original Game Boy, just with less features.

So apparently, despite having over 400 exclusive games(in the EU eshop), the DSi is not a new generation to some because DS still got games.

 

[Jo Shishido's Cheeks]

It was thought of as the next Game Boy then, rather than the new Game Boy.
Nintendo thinks of it that way now.
Fin.

 

[D.Lo]

So apparently, despite having over 400 exclusive games(in the EU eshop), the DSi is not a new generation to some because DS still got games.

Why are you quoting a post from several pages back but have not read the rest of the thread where this argument has been addressed? I actually do consider the DSi has a (weaker, but still decent) case as a separate platform. That has nothing to do with the GBC's case.

 

[beril]

Read the thread, this has been gone over. In many ways it was more of an upgrade than Wii was over Gamecube. Was the Wii not a new generation then, just because it's a small power bump? No, because the Wii added important new features that were not computing-power based too, and had new branding and big name exclusive games, just like GBC did, despite both being architecturally nearly identical to their predecessors.

Basically, Game Boy Color has some parallels with DSi and N3DS. But the weaker argument for DSi being a new generation doesn't therefore back-apply to GBC not being a new platform because of those parallels. N3DS not being a new platform/generation does not prove GBC was not a new platform/generation just because they have some things in common. Doing that is just trying to line things up more neatly than they acually are.

Similarly I'd say the GC/Wii case is irrelevant from the GB/GBC case. That was a different product line, a complete rebranding and a change of focus, and a big outlier from how most console generations work. I'd still probably argue that the Wii was a bigger hardware upgrade as well and certainly more competent hardware for 2006 than an 8bit Z80 derivative and 2bit color tiles was in 1998

 

[D.Lo]

Similarly I'd say the GC/Wii case is irrelevant from the GB/GBC case. That was a different product line, a complete rebranding and a change of focus, and a big outlier from how most console generations work. I'd still probably argue that the Wii was a bigger hardware upgrade as well and certainly more competent hardware for 2006 than an 8bit Z80 derivative and 2bit color tiles was in 1998

I completely agree, but you've now made a completely different argument from 'it can't be a new generation because the architecture is the same and it was just a small power bump' which was all you used before to justify your position. Now we both agree that you can be a new generation/platform despite only being a small power bump with the same architecture.

 

[beril]

I completely agree, but you've now made a completely different argument from 'it can't be a new generation because the architecture is the same and it was just a small power bump' which was all you used before to justify your position. Now we both agree that you can be a new generation/platform despite only being a small power bump with the same architecture.

Well that's how it usually works in every case other than GC/Wii, and people in the thread were arguing that the slight powerbump means it was more significant than just a colour upgrade.

But with an architecture like that, where you're writing most of the code in assembler and writing directly to hardware registers, I just can't see it as a new platform just because it has higher clock speed and some tacked on features, even though yes it means you can do some things you couldn't before.
It's a bit different with newer hardware where you code in high level languages and have APIs to access a full fledged programmable GPU, and you don't really care about the hardware much outside of performance.

 

[Aostia]

An add-on is an add-on, while a new hardware is a new hardware.

So new 3ds shouldn't be counted as 3ds?

 

[stan423321]

So apparently, despite having over 400 exclusive games(in the EU eshop), the DSi is not a new generation to some because DS still got games.

Actually cutoff of support for old systems sounds like a pretty sensible argument for sub-generation distinguishing. As good as any, really.

As a European, I will also be somewhat dismissing of those 400 exclusive titles in European DSi Shop, since the way DSiWare worked resulted in huge amount of content splitting, both across languages and episodes. Sure, title is a title, but if Pokemon releases in ten flavors instead of two while keeping similarly low differentiation, this won't magically make the corresponding Nintendo system worth more.

 

[D.Lo]

Well that's how it usually works in every case other than GC/Wii, and people in the thread were arguing that the slight powerbump means it was more significant than just a colour upgrade.

But with an architecture like that, where you're writing most of the code in assembler and writing directly to hardware registers, I just can't see it as a new platform just because it has higher clock speed and some tacked on features, even though yes it means you can do some things you couldn't before.
It's a bit different with newer hardware where you code in high level languages and have APIs to access a full fledged programmable GPU, and you don't really care about the hardware much outside of performance.

I think you're hung up on the term generation from a computing perspective. Even though it was just a bump, it was clearly a completely new platform.

I mean MSX, Colecovision and SG1000 are basically identical computers, but are completely distinct platforms. Heck throw the Mark III in there as a feature added back-compat spec bump of the SG1000, and the Game Gear as a back-compat tiny spec bump of that. GBC was a distinct new platform from Nintendo, with new features like Color and the IR port. Computing hardware doesn't come into it, game compatibility defines what a separate platform is.

 

[mclem]

Game Boy / Game Boy Color
DS / DSi
3DS / New 3DS

All the same basic idea, though there's a better argument for GBC to be counted on its own than DSi or N3DS.

I'd say the DSi has a decent say too, not due to the hardware, but due to the infrastructure, since the DSi had unique downloadable titles that the DS couldn't access, even if it could plausibly run them.

 

[BGBW]

Well unlike the new 3DS or DSi, the promotional material at the time did seem to treat the GameBoy Color as its own brand new system.

Back then we had the Nintendo 64 boasting games in 3D and here we had the GameBoy Color boasting portable games in colour! (Even though we all know it wasn't the first). It was new and cool! (Well this was the 90s after all)

Every game was branded GameBoy Color from then on, with the only exception being Pokémon, since it took so many years to reach us.

I was young at the time mind, with the GameBoy Color being my first GameBoy (if you don't count the Super GameBoy), but it very much felt like it was the brand new thing and you were the bee's knees compared to all the kids still playing on their old B&W GameBoys. Doubt you'd have the same feeling with the DSi or new 3DS.

 

[Narpas Sword0]

I don't understand why people think this wasn't marketed as the new hotness.

I didn't ask for, and I didn't get, and no one felt any desire for: the top loading NES, the revised SNES, the Model 2 and 3 Genesis, and to some extent the Pocket. Everyone just kept playing their same games throughout the gen and beyond without updating.

If you didn't get a GBC, you played no new handheld games for 2-3 years. And you didn't know at the start how long that would be.

Do you guys think Nintendo and retailers would be happy with you buying a standard GB in 1999, when you would only be able to buy 2-10 year old clearance games and none of the full price new releases? No, they were pushing you toward GBC. Which may even have been the only thing being manufactured.

To treat the GBC as a revision in the year after its release would be to just keep playing G/S and LA DX and shovelware and be unable to play anything new.


You would miss out on more games if you went straight from GB to GBA than if you went straight from SNES to GameCube. And instead of just buying a PlayStation to keep yourself in the loop, you would instead abandon the entire concept of handheld gaming, since there was no real competition. Failing to purchase this "revision" would be a literal lifestyle change.

 

[Nostremitus]

In magazines, and the GB Color sections in every gaming store. And in TV ads.

Nothing in that commercial said anything other than that it was a revision of the Gameboy with a color screen. The title they showed off was Tetris. It says, "Escape into a world of color for each and every Gameboy game." That's not the marketing of a new generation of handhelds.

 

[BGBW]

Nothing in that commercial said anything other than that it was a revision of the Gameboy with a color screen. Hell, the title they showed off was Tetris.

Tetris DX to be precise, the GameBoy Color version.

Funny how the Switch is bringing back the Deluxe suffix that was used for a lot of GB -> GBC ports.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

If you were a little kid who didn't get a Game Boy until Pokemon, the GB and GBC are one system. This is because the system you got, the GBC, played all GB games and you were none the wiser because you'd never seen an original GB before anyway.

You also didn't refer to the GBC as a "Game Boy Color." You referred to it as a "Game Boy."

Culture overrules specs and content, in this case.

 

[Shifty1897]

Why are Game Boy and Game Boy Color hardware sales combined so often?

Wait... what year is it?

 

[Celine]

Around 1996 press leaked that Nintendo was working on a 32 bit full color successor of the Game Boy (which at the time saw the release of a new revision named Game Boy Pocket).
The project was codenamed Project Atlantis and was a brand new architecture, not just a spec bump.
The project was eventually shelved before the release of the Game Boy Color.
Nintendo had no reason to not keep going with a revision of the original Game Boy due to lack of rivals and Pokémon lifting the original Game Boy business.

Years later Nintendo has shown a prototype:

For some more info:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=183358

 

[Narpas Sword0]

If you were a little kid who didn't get a Game Boy until Pokemon, the GB and GBC are one system. This is because the system you got, the GBC, played all GB games and you were none the wiser because you'd never seen an original GB before anyway.

You also didn't refer to the GBC as a "Game Boy Color." You referred to it as a "Game Boy."

Culture overrules specs and content, in this case.

Right, this is also why the PSX never existed. The first Gulf War also didn't happen.

The PS2 is kind of weird because it both existed and didn't existed for PS3 owners, so it kind of phases between dimensions based on who is in the room with you.

 

[Fiendcode]

Sorry I didn't see your emoji

How many DSi games said DSi on the package? Over 700 games had GBC on the package.

And where are you getting '800 exclusives'? I see 360 Dsiware games. And there is an argument for DSi being a separate platform too, but an online-only platform, it only had 4(?) exclusive retail games.

Where are you getting only 360 DSiWare games from? In the US DSiWare shop alone there are 573 games and 29 applications, not including anything that was delisted.

In terms of exclusives it goes DSi > GBC > n3DS. Really no way around that.

Also worth noting there are more GBC games playable on a GB than DSi on DS or n3DS on 3DS.

 

[yurinka]

I assume they merge the numbers because want to show a bigger one when using it for competitive comparisions.

It was BC and had a very similar name and form factor, but technologically was more powerful and had a lot of exclusive games that didn't run in the original gameboys.

 

[Nostremitus]

If you were a little kid who didn't get a Game Boy until Pokemon, the GB and GBC are one system. This is because the system you got, the GBC, played all GB games and you were none the wiser because you'd never seen an original GB before anyway.

You also didn't refer to the GBC as a "Game Boy Color." You referred to it as a "Game Boy."

Culture overrules specs and content, in this case.

Or, if you were old enough to see what the GBC was when it came out... a revision. Honestly think the people who thought it was its own thing were too young to know better at the time.

I love how the argument has devolved to things like "You only think it was a Gameboy revision because you were either too young/ not born yet..."

Its been aimed at me several times even though I was in high School when the thing launched.

Tetris DX to be precise, the GameBoy Color version.

Funny how the Switch is bringing back the Deluxe suffix that was used for a lot of GB -> GBC ports.

Wasn't marketed as anything but a Color screened Gameboy. That was the point of that piece of discussion.

 

[Fiendcode]

I assume they merge the numbers because want to show a bigger one when using it for competitive comparisions.

It's a revision. Like how DS and DSi or 3DS and n3DS are merged. Or PS4 and PS4 Pro.

 

[sixteen-bit]

The GBC had twice the processing power of the GB so I had always considered them different generations. Surprised that Nintendo thinks differently.

 

[Nostremitus]

The GBC had twice the processing power of the GB so I had always considered them different generations. Surprised that Nintendo thinks differently.

So does the 3DS-n3DS. The n3DS has twice the processors and they are also clocked higher.

 

[deriks]

It's a upgraded system, but not planned as a "new pillar".

 

[Weltall Zero]

GBC exclusive games are? I highly doubt that.

It's a weird anomaly of a thing but in general most GBC games run on a Gameboy so they might as well be the same system. Semantics

I also thought GBC exclusives were only a handful, but then I did the research and that's far from the truth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Game_Boy_Color_games

Order by "backwards compatibilily" and it's very plain to see there are more games without BC than games with it.

Under that prism, I've changed my mind: the GBC should really be considered a different console. It's as much a new console with backwards compatibility as any other in the Gameboy / DS line.

 

[Branduil]

Nothing in that commercial said anything other than that it was a revision of the Gameboy with a color screen. The title they showed off was Tetris. It says, "Escape into a world of color for each and every Gameboy game." That's not the marketing of a new generation of handhelds.

The entire point of the commercial is contrasting the black-and-white world of unfun(like the original Game Boy!) with the brand new hotness, the Game Boy Color. Yes, they emphasize that it can play Game Boy games(in color!) because access to the entire GB library was a big selling point, since there weren't that many GBC games yet. But this commercial is clearly selling the GBC as an entirely new and different experience- you would never see, and could never make, an equivalent commercial for the DSi and N3DS.

I assume they merge the numbers because want to show a bigger one when using it for competitive comparisions.

It was BC and had a very similar name and form factor, but technologically was more powerful and had a lot of exclusive games that didn't run in the original gameboys.

Honestly it's probably because they don't want to bother trying to figure out whether to count black karts as sales for the GB or the GBC.

 

[yurinka]

It's a revision. Like how DS and DSi or 3DS and n3DS are merged. Or PS4 and PS4 Pro.

It's very difficult to consider it just a revision when most of its games, hundreds of them (more than the N64 catalog as mentioned above), are exclusive for this system and can't be played in the previous platform.

So I think it makes sense to consider it a new generation with BC instead of just a revision.

 

[Narpas Sword0]

If you stuck with your GB instead of a GBC you played close to zero major releases from 1999 to 2001. You left the handheld market and played on a console instead for three years.

Listing a bunch of decent launch window black cart games doesn't really mean anything. After the first few months you were playing Nickelodeon shovelware instead of Mario, Zelda, Dragon Warrior, Metal Gear, Crystalis, and many more.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

Right, this is also why the PSX never existed. The first Gulf War also didn't happen.

The PS2 is kind of weird because it both existed and didn't existed for PS3 owners, so it kind of phases between dimensions based on who is in the room with you.

This is exactly correct. I also view black and white movies as being in color because I never owned a black and white TV and I just attribute the "in color" color scheme as colored gray scale. Black and white and color photography are the same thing.

Or, if you were old enough to see what the GBC was when it came out... a revision. Honestly think the people who thought it was its own thing were too young to know better at the time.

I love how the argument has devolved to things like "You only think it was a Gameboy revision because you were either too young/ not born yet..."

I should clarify that my post wasn't that the youth-based perspective is correct, it's that it is common. This POV obviously has no bearing on how why the systems have their sales grouped in official reports.

 

[beril]

Honestly it's probably because they don't want to bother trying to figure out whether to count black karts as sales for the GB or the GBC.

Or they simply always saw it as a revision, and didn't expect it to become as popular or to get as many exclusives as it did. They didn't release an exclusive for it themselves until some 6 months after launch, and there were barely any exclusives at all for the first 6 months. But I guess devs saw it selling well and were desperate for every bit of performance they could get out of it, but really it's no different from DSi, N3DS, or PS4Pro

If you stuck with your GB instead of a GBC you played close to zero major releases from 1999 to 2001. You left the handheld market and played on a console instead for three years.

Listing a bunch of decent launch window black cart games doesn't really mean anything. After the first few months you were playing Nickelodeon shovelware instead of Mario, Zelda, Dragon Warrior, Metal Gear, Crystalis, and many more.

1999 still had a lot of good GB releases and GBA was released early 2001 so it was really only a one year drought. And the GB had been pretty much dead for years before Pokemon revived it anyway so that wasn't anything new. Still the GBC was a worthwhile upgrade with some nice exclusives but nothing will make me view it as a separate system

 

[Celine]

Or they simply always saw it as a revision, and didn't expect it to become as popular or to get as many exclusives as it did. They didn't release an exclusive for it themselves until some 6 months after launch, and there were barely any exclusives at all for the first 6 months. But I guess devs saw it selling well and were desperate for every bit of performance they could get out of it, but really it's no different from DSi, N3DS, or PS4Pro

Yep, the answer is simple.
Nintendo has always considered the GBC as a revision of the original GB family, with GBA being the first successor released in the market (as I written above in reality Nintendo was working to a true successor since at least 1995).
Bandai shared the same view as they included indistinctly WonderSwan and WonderSwan Color as a single product line when WonderSwan family total sales are concerned and in the case of the WS there are more games exclusive for the WonderSwan Color than games that can run on the original model.

 

[Narpas Sword0]

Or they simply always saw it as a revision, and didn't expect it to become as popular or to get as many exclusives as it did. They didn't release an exclusive for it themselves until some 6 months after launch, and there were barely any exclusives at all for the first 6 months. But I guess devs saw it selling well and were desperate for every bit of performance they could get out of it, but really it's no different from DSi, N3DS, or PS4Pro

If only a developer had provided some insight here...

How about we look at what an actual developer said on the topic?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=128057318&postcount=3930

If people aren't even gonna read through a 3 page thread I'm not gonna bother

 

[BGBW]

Wario Land 2 actually sees the systems as different. If you played it on a GBC and then tried to play it on a GB it would throw an error and prompt you to delete your save to start the game again.

I can only guess there were some graphical changes for palette reasons that are loaded at the start of a new game, but it's a strange oddity.

There was the Game Boy Color Promotional Demo, which you'd see playing in stores to advertise how new and shiny the system was. As far as I know, I've not seen anything like this for all the revision systems people keep comparing it to.

 

[Branduil]

Tetris DX to be precise, the GameBoy Color version.

Funny how the Switch is bringing back the Deluxe suffix that was used for a lot of GB -> GBC ports.

This also brings up another point- there were a ton of GB-->GBC remasters. How many systems get a bunch of remastered games for themselves?

 

[Jamix012]

This also brings up another point- there were a ton of GB-->GBC remasters. How many systems get a bunch of remastered games for themselves?

The PS4 and PS4 Pro. For all intents and purposes, a pro patch is the same as remastering the game for itself. And define "a tonne" I can think of Tetris and Link's Awakening off the top of my head. Pokemon Crystal at a stretch.

 

[beril]

If only a developer had provided some insight here...



If people aren't even gonna read through a 3 page thread I'm not gonna bother

I did read the thread, and I disagree with most of what he's saying there, but didn't want to reply to it since he didn't post in this thread himself.

Obviously even a slight bump means that you can do some things that wasn't possible before, but I don't don't think that qualifies it as a new generation (I mean New 3DS got an exclusive from Nintendo much quicker than GBC did). And nothing of what I've seen from Nintendo, including the snippet he posted, makes me think they ever saw it as such, even if apparently some developers did.

 

[Branduil]

The PS4 and PS4 Pro. For all intents and purposes, a pro patch is the same as remastering the game for itself. And define "a tonne" I can think of Tetris and Link's Awakening off the top of my head. Pokemon Crystal at a stretch.

Adding PC High presets to your game isn't really the same as completely overhauling a game's visuals from 4 shades of gray to full color.

 

[Jamix012]

Adding PC High presets to your game isn't really the same as completely overhauling a game's visuals from 4 shades of gray to full color.

Agree to disagree I suppose. I actually think the latter is likely easier especially for something like Tetris.

 

[Branduil]

Agree to disagree I suppose. I actually think the latter is likely easier especially for something like Tetris.

You think adding an option to run a game in 4K is more difficult than re-designing every single asset a game has?