Why didn't the Game Gear do better?

[attilathehun]

easy there with the code tags, they don't work for what you're doing. Quote is all you need. LOL Thats pretty obvious after the fact.

[Aussie2B]

Yeah, right... I'm a fanboy because I comprehend the meaning of the word monopoly and don't go throwing it around haphazardly just to insult companies that see more success than my favorite. :roll:

And I'm not bent out of shape over the game titles. I'm just letting you know that your point fails if no one knows what games you're using as examples.

[googlefest1]

Better games on gameboy? lol! Play MK, RR, DS on both systems and get back to me which is better.

Dude, I think I speak for most everyone when I say that I have no clue what games you're talking about. o_O We need some sort of frame of reference before you start naming every game by initials. My brain wants to read that as "Mario Kart, Ridge Racer, Nintendo DS". :P I assume the first is Mortal Kombat (which stunk on either handheld), but I'm clueless on the other too.

I think few will argue that most games on both were often better on Game Gear, but the whole "better games" argument is about their libraries as a whole and Game Boy exclusives versus Game Gear exclusives.


Sony's big money has knocked the bully down from his perch.

Bully? O_o They're a bully just because consumers happened to prefer the Game Boy? You could call Nintendo a bully for a lot of other things, but not because Game Boy was the better seller. If anything, Sega was being the "bully" in the handheld war. They constantly attacked the Game Boy in their marketing, while Nintendo prefered to just pretend that their competition didn't exist and try to sell their products on their own merits.

Anyway, I just recently got into Game Gear myself a few months ago, and I'm very happy to add the handheld to my collection. Unfortunately, I haven't even touched it in months. I greatly enjoyed Shining Force, but after that none of the games really caught my interest (I was kind of excited to play Defenders of Oasis until I discovered that, instead of being a Zelda-style adventure game, it's just a generic traditional RPG). However, I have recently made it a goal to beat all my Game Boy games, which I've been having a blast doing (admittedly, some aren't so thrilling). The Game Gear just doesn't have anything that can touch stuff like Wario Land, Castlevania 2: Belmont's Revenge, the Kirby titles, Metroid 2, Zelda: Link's Awakening, and many others. Color or not, most of the games just aren't as fun.

And of course, the Game Gear can be quite a pain to play after awhile. The blur and color shifting of the screen can strain the eyes, holding the big honking thing can strain the arms and hands, and just being stuck in place tethered to an outlet because it drains batteries like a mofo can cause stiffness and soreness.

Of course, the brick Game Boy can cause many of the same problems, but well, there's a reason why I never use my brick Game Boy anymore. I'll happily use the Game Boy Pocket, but no way am I using the brick.

i would say sega was trying to fight a bully with thier marketing - that comercial where the looser smacks his head with a dead squirl is still one of my favorites - HA HA HA

[attilathehun]

Yeah, right... I'm a fanboy because I comprehend the meaning of the word monopoly and don't go throwing it around haphazardly just to insult companies that see more success than my favorite. :roll:
Until the psp release Nintendo has held a monopoly in the portable game system market ever since they released the first Game Boy.

So you obvious denial of the facts make you not just a fanboy, but a blind one at that.

I have played gb, gbc, gba, gba sp and ds. They all totally blow except for ds

I played gg and nomad and they are way better just need descent rechargeable batteries to enjoy the gaming experience.

[Ed Oscuro]

So you obvious denial of the facts make you not just a fanboy, but a blind one at that.

I have played gb, gbc, gba, gba sp and ds. They all totally blow except for ds
You've no business calling Aussie a "fanboy" when you're so incredibly anti-GB and GBA.

Let it go.

[attilathehun]

So you obvious denial of the facts make you not just a fanboy, but a blind one at that.

I have played gb, gbc, gba, gba sp and ds. They all totally blow except for ds
You've no business calling Aussie a "fanboy" when you're so incredibly anti-GB and GBA.

Let it go. :fist: whatever. People that live in glass houses should not throw stones.

If he calls me one then there is no reason why I can not return the favor

The gg was a much superior product, because the controller layout was much more comfortable and it had a back lit color display. The gg looked and played better.

If Sega had the money to do a marketing blitz ala Sony. The GB would of been erased off the map.

FYI I wasn't anti gb from a fb perspective. I dont like it cause it sux donkey dick. It looks like crap. As I said before I played the entire gb series. A fb would just hate it in spite cause it's a competitor.

[Ed Oscuro]

:fist: whatever. People that live in glass houses should not throw stones.
You're really mature, friend.


If he calls me one then there is no reason why I can not return the favor
I also argued that Nintendo had a monopoly, but there wasn't any need for your personal attacks. Wisen up, would ya?


The gg was a much superior product, because the controller layout was much more comfortable and it had a back lit color display. The gg looked and played better.
The GG's screen was terribly fuzzy, despite being backlit. The layout wasn't awful, but I personally like the GB's just fine. You're full of opinions and present them as facts, which undermines the credibility of your message. It doesn't make you look particularly smart, and you're being hypocritical about the fanboy issue.


If Sega had the money to do a marketing blitz ala Sony. The GB would of been erased off the map.
The GG also could've used more polished releases. The GG has a bad rap of having lousy licensed games pushed onto it, and indeed, the seven or eight cartridges I got with my two GGs recently all were lousy (besides the Mickey Mouse platformer): G-Loc, which has little replay value and relies on luck, Aladdin/The Lion King (average licensed stuff), and I don't know what else. Years ago the first Game Gear game I played was The Simpsons vs. The World, which wasn't very good either. The Shinobi titles play well, but even less-known releases like Ninja Gaiden blow it away with much better background tilework, and the controls are just as good. The GG's palette was good, but the horrible motion blur and uninspired, ugly ports were pushed instead of great-looking exclusives. Didn't help that Sega's own Sonic games (at least the first one) were pretty lousy, too.

Of course, I know I'm just wasting my time with you because your mind's closed to the GB and you won't ever play any Game Boy games I recommend (Castlevania: Belmont's Revenge, Operation C, various Konami shooters like Gradius: Interstellar Assault, Twinbee, the Goemon games...all just Konami stuff). Even so, I'm doing it in case you decide to venture out of that shell of yours.


FYI I wasn't anti gb from a fb perspective. I dont like it cause it sux donkey dick. It looks like crap.
Again, comments like this show you're just wasting everybody's time.

Sorta like in the RPG thread, where you didn't bother to read through the posts.

Basically, from your posts you seem to have no attention span, you don't read, you diss products you don't understand, and on top of it all you're needlessly insulting.

[Jorpho]

Actually the GB controller lay out just leads to carpel tunnel syndrom. The GG had a ergonomic button design. Way more comfortable.

That's debatable.


Anyways the GB MK had no fatalities. :/

There are many reasons to dislike GB MK, but it did not lack fatalities.

[attilathehun]

I also argued that Nintendo had a monopoly, but there wasn't any need for your personal attacks. Wisen up, would ya?


The GG's screen was terribly fuzzy, despite being backlit. The layout wasn't awful, but I personally like the GB's just fine. You're full of opinions and present them as facts, which undermines the credibility of your message. It doesn't make you look particularly smart, and you're being hypocritical about the fanboy issue.

The GG also could've used more polished releases. The GG has a bad rap of having lousy licensed games pushed onto it, and indeed, the seven or eight cartridges I got with my two GGs recently all were lousy (besides the Mickey Mouse platformer): G-Loc, which has little replay value and relies on luck, Aladdin/The Lion King (average licensed stuff), and I don't know what else. Years ago the first Game Gear game I played was The Simpsons vs. The World, which wasn't very good either. The Shinobi titles play well, but even less-known releases like Ninja Gaiden blow it away with much better background tilework, and the controls are just as good. The GG's palette was good, but the horrible motion blur and uninspired, ugly ports were pushed instead of great-looking exclusives. Didn't help that Sega's own Sonic games (at least the first one) were pretty lousy, too.

Of course, I know I'm just wasting my time with you because your mind's closed to the GB and you won't ever play any Game Boy games I recommend (Castlevania: Belmont's Revenge, Operation C, various Konami shooters like Gradius: Interstellar Assault, Twinbee, the Goemon games...all just Konami stuff). Even so, I'm doing it in case you decide to venture out of that shell of yours.


Sorta like in the RPG thread, where you didn't bother to read through the posts.

Basically, from your posts you seem to have no attention span, you don't read, you diss products you don't understand, and on top of it all you're needlessly insulting.All your needless personal attacks and fb hyprocrisy is a total waste of my time. :moon:

Oh yeah like the gb didn't have any crappy licensed titles.

I played the gb so you don't need to tell me how great castlevania is on it.
Anyways that's a perfect example of N's control of a 3rd party title.

Disney games like Aladin and Lion King were good games with decent graphics back in the day.

Here's a fact for yah. It is quite evident which one looks better and is more accurate translation.
http://img425.imageshack.us/img425/2606/mkgb2pu.gif
http://img425.imageshack.us/img425/8905/mkgg1xp.png

[Aussie2B]

Hah, attilathehun's method of debating appears to be copying words we use and throwing them back at us nonsensically. Look, Ed, he stole your "personal attacks" and "hyprocrisy"! (Although, sadly, he couldn't get the spelling right on the latter.)

Like Ed said, you're speaking in absolutes and state your opinions as facts, which is the number one sign of a fanboy. While on the other hand, you call me a fanboy based solely on my opinions, despite that I enjoy my Game Gear AND have no problem respecting the opinions of someone who likes it better than Game Boy (as long as they show me the same respect). Unlike you, where you insulted every single person who prefers Game Boy over Game Gear, with no provocation prior even.

Castlevania is an example of Nintendo's control of a third party title? Gimme a break. Nintendo may have controlled matters like censorship, quality control, and number of releases per year with an iron fist, but they couldn't force a third party to develop a game for Game Boy. Likewise, they couldn't stop one from releasing a game on a competitor's product. If a third party saw fit to create a game for Game Boy and not Game Gear, it was probably because they figured their product would sell better on the more popular handheld. Why do you think the DS and PSP have such different libraries? It's because the developers know which system their product would fare better on.

Ed is right in that there are some ways that you could theorize that Nintendo had some sort of monopoly, but none of your "proof" is valid in the slightest.

[attilathehun]

Like Ed said, you're speaking in absolutes and state your opinions as facts, which is the number one sign of a fanboy. While on the other hand, you call me a fanboy based solely on my opinions, despite that I enjoy my Game Gear AND have no problem respecting the opinions of someone who likes it better than Game Boy (as long as they show me the same respect). Unlike you, where you insulted every single person who prefers Game Boy over Game Gear, with no provocation prior even.

Castlevania is an example of Nintendo's control of a third party title? Gimme a break. Nintendo may have controlled matters like censorship, quality control, and number of releases per year with an iron fist, but they couldn't force a third party to develop a game for Game Boy. Likewise, they couldn't stop one from releasing a game on a competitor's product. If a third party saw fit to create a game for Game Boy and not Game Gear, it was probably because they figured their product would sell better on the more popular handheld. Why do you think the DS and PSP have such different libraries? It's because the developers know which system their product would fare better on.

Ed is right in that there are some ways that you could theorize that Nintendo had some sort of monopoly, but none of your "proof" is valid in the slightest.That's exactly what Nintendo wants you to think. Obviously you are nothing more the a brainwashed Nintendobot.

Your Nintendo appologetics wont' fly with me. You clearly can not grasp the concept of a 3rd party exclusive.

Ideally the 3rd party developer will make more money crossing platforms especially if it is a popular game/series.

Nintendo would rather have a outside developer to make a game for them exclusively and it can be part of thier contractual obligation, or the game can not be released to the competitor over a certain time period.

New York State v. Nintendo lawsuit: the state attorney general sues Nintendo over the monopoly of the video game industry. Nintendo loses the suit and offers customers a $5 rebate on Nintendo games. Nintendo laughed thier way to the bank on this one. Instead of losing money they made money for losing a lawsuit. Quite a rarity and probably a first.


Enough with the drama queen tactics ok?

[Aussie2B]

Drama queen tactics? Boy, you really pulled that one out of your ass. What, did you finally realize that I'm a chick, so you tried to think of some random female-suitable insult? Nothing about any of my posts have been "dramatic" in the least.

So you think, if they had their way, every third party developer would release every game they develop on every piece of hardware currently available? You clearly don't understand anything about the business aspect of the industry. Porting a game to another piece of hardware (or remaking it entirely, which often had to be done in previous generations when game were multi-platform) takes time, money, and effort, and depending on the demographic of the hardware, it may not always be profitable. If you look at the history of the Castlevania series, very few titles have appeared on more than one platform. The Game Gear didn't get the Game Boy Castlevania titles, just like Nintendo never got Bloodlines, Rondo of Blood, the X68000 Castlevania, Symphony of the Night, etc. Rather than stretch their employees and products thin, Konami chose to put all their effort into ONE version of a game, in hopes that consumers will see it as a must-have exclusive. Most of the Game Boy's library is exclusive to that hardware because not only would they have to completely remake the titles for any other hardware, but many of the games were also far more suitable for that audience than the Game Gear's demographic (where arcade-style games were more popular).

[Milk]

I thought this topic was about why the Game Gear didn't do as well as the Game Boy. How many posts ago was that? Who cares if the Game Gear was the best thing next to warm chocolate pudding, the system is dead while the Game Boy line is almost 20 years old now. The best systems don't always make the most money.

[attilathehun]

Drama queen tactics? Boy, you really pulled that one out of your ass. What, did you finally realize that I'm a chick, so you tried to think of some random female-suitable insult? Nothing about any of my posts have been "dramatic" in the least.
See post! :above me: That's my whole point.

You dont need to go off on intangents either.

Despite the superiority of the game gear in hardware that provided better quality gaming experience. It failed because of Nintendo's monopoly in the hand held market and the lack of money to successfully break Nintendo's hold on the portable video gaming. That is why the game gear failed. Sony's is a perfect example that it takes lots of money to send the bully to the grave yard.