The Sega Nomad released in 95 which is basically a Genesis handheld3 years after the GBA ,Sony released the equivalent of a PS2 in handheld formThe GBA (SNES equivalent )should have released in 96 and the DS in 2001(PS1 equivalent)+4 face buttons and a good screen
>>12582196No it was exactly as powered as it was in 2001.What’s the point in these sort of threads? Why larp about something that never happened. It’s not retro to make up alternate universes
>>12582196Nintendo always prioritized affordability and accessibility over cutting edge tech, especially with their handhelds. Their target audience was kids who would have to borrow remote batteries for power, not adults with jobs who could buy batteries themselves. They weren't aiming for immersive all day experiences but something that could be played in intervals.
>>12582221>They weren't aiming for immersive all day experiences but something that could be played in intervals.Well you won't be able to play much GBA thanks to it's awfull screen,you can't play when it's dark or where there is sun...
>>12582196i believe they initially were developing a stronger handheld, but pokemania made them 180 for something cheaper
yes it was underpowered which is why it didn't sell any units and then nintendo went out of business
>>12582210>No it was exactly as powered as it was in 2001Nah we should have got PS1 level graphics with 4 face buttons and a screen that doesn't suck ass
>>12582196Yes that's why they had to cut it's life so short.
Nintendo could've released a rebranded GB Color in those days and still sold gangbusters because of Pokemon
>>12582224that's the fault of the worm light lobby, thankfully the SP killed it
>GBA (SNES equivalent )Wrong. The GBA was much more powerful than the SNES.
>>12582196It was far more capable in all regards than the WonderSwan Color, which was its only real competition at the time. There was zero need, financially, to release something better. Calling it a SNES equivalent is also a little disingenuous, it’s still significantly more powerful than SNES or Genesis, resolution notwithstanding.
>>12582567Almost all SNES/Genesis ports are significantly worse on GBASonic 1 run like ass
https://youtu.be/HAMtnpyqaX0?si=hAHYwQflVFkBPvtY GBA getting destroyed by a handheld from 1995
>>12582196>The GBA (SNES equivalent )I feel like people parrot this shit just because the GBA got ports of SNES gamesAside from the shitty audio, it's much more powerful than the SNESEven with the Super FX chip, the SNES could never do something like webm related
>>12582215You mean systems that should already be discussed on this board but aren't for arbitrary reasons?
>>12582575> Sonic 1 run like assMan, everybody knows 98% of the reason that port was so shit was dev incompetence. Ports often suffered because of the lower resolution, which I already mentioned. GBA could do passable ports of Doom and Duke Nukem, something the SNES and Genesis would never be capable of without enhancement chips or add ons.
>>12582196Nintendo handhelds were always one gen behind cutting edge so they'd be cheap enough to be competitive.
>>12582609>Nintendo handhelds were always one gen behindThat's the problem ,GBA was 2 Gen behind!!!Gameboy,Gamegear,Nomad,PSP were one gen behind
Talking about gaming hardware like it was an arms race was always just a retarded marketing gimmick. GBA was as powerful as it needed to be to sell on the market.
what about [REDACTED] games that are basically GBA titles with a second map screen tacked on?
>>12582857Not retro
>>12582597damn, this looks awesome
>>12582615The Nomad was quite literally a portable Genesis seeing as it played Genesis cartridges. You need to take that one out of the equation here.
>>12582857Fuck off
>>12582196OP, you’re forgetting that the GBA was fully backwards compatible with GB and GBC cartridges. It was designed as the ultimate Game Boy handheld before Nintendo transitioned to the DS.
>>12582881>>12582862kys
>>12582857>>12582891go back>>>/v/
>>12582546the gba is very roughly equivalent to a snes with the superfx built in. he's alluding to the fact most games on the gba looked more or less like snes games
>>12582608*ahem*
>>12582902>>12582597
>>12582902>roughly equivalent to a snes with the superfx built in.That was pretty impressive for a handheld running on two AA batteries in 2001 imo.
>>12582226it's interesting how pokemon literally single handedly flipped the handheld market on its head. the gameboy was almost dead when pokemon dropped. nintendo had plans for a gb successor in 1997 but dropped it because of pokemon in favour of a minor gb upgrade (gbc)
>>12582907that's why i say very roughly. there are a handful of gba games that did things even the superfx couldn't. given a talented dev you could squeeze out something in between perhaps the 3do and psx, though it's hard to compare directly especially as the gba has a lower res screen than games on those consoles ran at, so less pixels to render>>12582912yea, i remember when it came out and it wasn't considered weak for a handheld
>>12582914
>>12582902>very roughly equivalent to a snes with the superfx built inShow me a Super FX game with as much texture mapping as V-Rally 3
>>12582196Nintendo was feeling the pain of having their asses handed to them by Sony and the Wonderswan was about to do the same thing Sony did to them in the Japanese handheld market so they rushed out the GBA.
>>12582196After seeing the fuck up of the GameGear they decided battery life >>> graphics
Just as I told you, bait thread for offtopic stuff >>12582857>>12582605
>>12582196You could look at it as being only a better than Lynx. But at the time I considered it very impressive since it could do mode 7 effects while $400 Palm pilot type devices at the time couldn't even get close to Mario Kart.
it was supposed to have 128k of RAM but they saw the PSP's specs and decided to generously give it 256k
>>12584568They saw the specs of a handheld that wasn’t in development yet?
>>12582608Exactly, Stealth made a proof-of-concept almost 2 decades ago.
>>12582196Well it was using an ARM7 CPU built for 1997 Nokia phones. By 2001 it was certainly obsolete. Nintendo didn't even bother using the ARM710 40MHz core which has an internal cache. It also uses a sprite controller, which is obsolete technology by the 2000s, they could've easily done it in software using DMA.
>>12585019it was supposed to come out around 1997 and it would have been high end then, idk what other differences it would have had but it was using the same cpu. technically it wasn't high end in 2001 but there wasn't another option besides the wonderswan colour... but that didn't have pokemon so there was no competition
>>12582196historically nintendo makes cheaper consoles that print money for them. then they win.
>>12582608>SNES and Genesis would never be capable of without enhancement chips or add ons.there's already a SNES and Genesis DOOM though? Genesis version ran fine for me, so i hate console controls on a FPS.
>>12585112>BUT i hate console controls on a FPS.
>>12585102Technically there was GP32 from Korea with a powerful 133MHz samsung SOC and 8MB SSD, it was only $50 more than GBA despite the vastly superior hardware, but sadly nobody made games for it.
>>12585141i've heard of the gp32 but didn't realise it was that old
>>12585112He said "would never be capable of without enhancement chips or add ons"You even quoted it
>>12585170https://www.megavisions.net/crazy-sega-nerds-fan-ports-doom-to-the-sega-genesis/there's a fan port which didn't need the 32X if you meant the Genesis version.didn't know SNES needed Super FX 2 chip to run it.
>>12585205>Anyway, back to Mega Doom! The game is said to run on the FPGA (field-programmable gate array) inside the Mega EverDrive Pro flash cartridge, meaning (from what I’m told) it won’t run on the native hardware alone or on emulators.
>>12585141This is now decently emulatable in RetroArch by the way.
>>12585213>>12585205it has a non-fpga version but it's unoptimised and runs in seconds per frame
>>12582196>3 years after the GBA ,Sony released the equivalent of a PS2 in handheld formNot even close!
>>12585213not just that, it's technically not even actually running on the genesis hardware in any normal way. the fpga is essentially running pc doom through the cart, and then that's running to the genesis as visual tiles to be rendered onto the screen. the genesis basically becomes a video player at that point. no fucking wonder it can't run on an emulator.
>>12585320The PSP was really more like a PS1.5 just like the GBA was a SNES 1.5 and the Game Gear was a Sega System 1.5
>>12585320It's much closer to the PS2 than the GBA to the PS1
>>12585328>PSP was really more like a PS1.5PSP was more powerful than Dreamcast. >GBA was a SNES 1.5GBA was more powerful than SNES even with SuperFX2.>Game Gear was a Sega System 1.5Game Gear was literally sega system with cmos chip.
>>12585320Would a TimeSplitters video game work on PSP?
>>12585656Yes, but with simplified geometry. The GPU is weaker than PS2's EE, and the filrate is lower than PS2's GS, but the CPU is about equal in power. It ran Battlefront games fine.
>>12585916>but the CPU is about equal in power.Nah PS2 CPU has coprocessor to greatly expand it's capacity
>>12585923Same with the PSP, it has one FPU and one Vector FPU coprocessors. The vector performance is just not as high as PS2, that's how I understand it.
