Topic: Am I the only one excited about DS emulating OTHER SYSTEMS?

[jasonditz]

I would say if there's enough money in it to put Neo Geo games on a DS card there's enough money to port the game outright so it doesn't lag.

[Bloodworth]

Well, considering that the DS is not supposed to replace the Game Boy line, I think it's great that they included GBA compatibility -- especially since it means adding a second cartridge bay.  I can understand it not playing GB and GBC games though.  It had to happen eventually.  They can only put in so many extra parts.  I'm amazed they kept the same line going for so long anyways since they never pulled it off with cartridges on home consoles.

[Ian Sane]

"I'm pretty sure they said the DS can't play GB and GBC games cause it lacks the older CPUs. But like I said, who cares when the DS can easily emulate them."

Well I care since getting an emulator on the DS and finding ROMs for it, even for titles I own, is going to be a pain in the ass.  Plus I want to play the saved games I already have not start over with ROMs.

The lack of GB/GBC support is going to affect my purchase decision.  I haven't really seen anything on the DS yet that makes me want to buy it but I was considering getting one since I can't see sh!t with my original design GBA and I figured that instead of getting an SP I might as well get a DS and have access to more games.  However without GB/GBC support I'll probably just wait for the supposed "true" followup to the GBA and see what's up with it.  I can wait until the DS releases a game I can't turn down.  Afterall knowing Nintendo they'll release the DS SP that includes GB/GBC support.  They've kind of conditioned me to not buy their portables right away.  The GB Pocket was around for like a year before the GBC came out only to be followed by the GBA a few years later only the be followed by the SP a year later.  It's like if I don't wait until after the first Christmas I'm going to get screwed for certain.

"I'm amazed they kept the same line going for so long anyways since they never pulled it off with cartridges on home consoles."

Well they only started using backwards compatibility with the GBC which came out a little over five years ago so it's a relatively new concept.  Considering they were still trying to sell NES games in 1994(!) they probably would have made their cartridge consoles backwards compatible had they thought of it at the time.

[jasonditz]

Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Well, considering that the DS is not supposed to replace the Game Boy line, I think it's great that they included GBA compatibility -- especially since it means adding a second cartridge bay.  I can understand it not playing GB and GBC games though.  It had to happen eventually.  They can only put in so many extra parts.  I'm amazed they kept the same line going for so long anyways since they never pulled it off with cartridges on home consoles.

I disagree. Each new iteration of hardware is several times more powerful than the previous line. The Nintendo DS is more than capable of emulating the GBC and GB in software so long as there is a cartridge port capable of fitting the games, and beyond that you could fit the entire architecture of the GBC on a very tiny chip, so not having the option built in is flat out laziness on their part.

Even calling it GBA compatibility is misleading, because it is lacking a key feature that the GBA has, the ability to play GB/GBC cartridges.

If they're going to leave GB/GBC out of the mix, I'd almost feel better if they hadn't put the GBA port on there to begin with. Quite frankly, like Ian said, it leaves you feeling like there's a fundamental missing element that might be corrected in some later revision of the hardware...

[joeamis]

I'd rather have GBA compatability then not have it.  If they waited to include it in a future version of the console it would be because of price.  They probably figure the majority of DS owners aren't interested in playing games that far back regularly so it's not worth raising the cost of the DS with more hardware.

[jasonditz]

The thing is, a small IC with the GB/GBC hardware in it ordered on that large of a scale would cost literally pennies. Why risk alienating anyone, even if you don't think it will be a lot of people?

[joeamis]

Well Nintendo must have some good reasons, it's not like they just wouldn't include the compatability because they don't want to go through the trouble of doing it.

[jasonditz]

We don't know for sure that they aren't, its just speculation at this point. I'm just saying I for one would be majorly disappointed if they didn't.

[Blackknight131]

Its possible the GBA backwards compatibility may also have been a pleasant coincidence in the hardware design. Maybe not likely, but poissible.
The ARM Processor that serves as the GBA's brain is afterall already part of the hardware, regardless of backwards compatibility or not (I think its the ARM 7, the weaker of the two DS processors?). Adding the backwards compatiblity then may simply have come down to designing an expansion port (which likely would have been included in some shape or form anyway) that accepted GBA carts....I do remember Reggie mentioning that it was also the DS's peripheral expansion port.
~~~~~~

The DS is meant to be a standalone, at least from what I heard of it orignally. Which makes me think that the inclusion of any kinds of backward compatibility is really going to confuse consumers down the line who are going to look at this as the next gameBoy....I know myself and apparently others on this board are confused, and were the ones who stay informed!
At any rate, assuming Nintendo is deadly serious about this "third pillar" concept (Im a sucker for whatever Miyamoto says...if he says its the third pillar Im generally like "Yes, Sir!") I agree with the previously stated opinion that inclusion of the GBC backwards compatibility ( a key GBA-specific feature) only serves to further blur the lines between the two handhelds. As such, it makes sense if they really will practice differentiation of the two units.
I dont know if someone voiced this eariler, but I wonder if Nintendo refuses to call it the next gameboy only because they realize the hardware may be hit or miss....and they do not want to risk tarnishing their most powerful console brand name, the ubiquitous "GameBoy".

-Blackknight131

[Bloodworth]

Nintendo isn't calling it the next Game Boy mainly because that's how they approached the design of the system.  They basically said: Let's come up with an entirely new product that isn't an extension of our current hardware.  However, I wouldn't be surprised if in the long run, it does replace Game Boy.

[Terranigma Freak]

I would rather see the DS replace GBA rather than go with the "simply make it more powerful and call it GBA2." It's the revolutionary design that has me sold on DS.