In the face of the technical knowledge of these big brains, we can only bow before them with humble respect.
At that time it was a great innovation. But notice what a small screen compared to the console. In addition, it weighed a lot. It was an abomination.Look the game gear was developed 1988/1989...
Yes, but it was over 10 years before the GBA. I'm sure it was possible at that point to make that more practically.At that time it was a great innovation. But notice what a small screen compared to the console. In addition, it weighed a lot. It was an abomination.
I did not know that. Thanks for the information. So it would have been possible to do that without overexposure for sure?Backlight or not isn't the problem. The LCD is just trash. That's the whole reason why games had oversaturated or too bright assets.
Yes. Also backlit I believe.The similarly monstrous Atari Lynx was also produced and distributed in the same period of Game Gear, but with few titles, little known, and not very successful.
But I'm going off topic...
Yes, but it was 10 years before the GBA. I'm sure it was possible at that point to make that more practically.
BTW: I have commented on your translations on your blog and you have not answered.
Also used a florescent bulb and required 6 batteries like the GG:Yes. Also backlit I believe.
I'm sure it would look fine with a better LCD. To get an idea of what i mean with trash try the GBA color shader in mGBA and compare. You will see how bad it is.I did not know that. Thanks for the information. So it would have been possible to do that without overexposure for sure?
@Creamu I humbly apologize. I didn't notice! Push Notifications don't work in blogs, so I couldn't have known. Thank you for your interest. I will look into them tomorrow.I have commented on your translations on your blog and you have not answered.
If you like those try Iridion 2, Motoracer Advance, openlara GBAHowever, those early GBA titles that you so despise were not so bad. Breath of Fire series, Final Fantasy Series, Doom 1/2, I prefer them in this version with brighter and more vivid colors than the darker and more somber ones of the SNES. Personal opinion and not disputable...........
I see, whatever they could have done to avoid the overexposure route would have been the right approach. Also adding two more facebuttons.The Pocket Colour TV I referenced was still relatively thicker than the GBA despite using a similar approach to the GG.
If they did really want to put a backlight on the GBA, I doubt they would go down this route.
Okay. But it is important to add that ther is more than 10 year of technical progess inbetween them.Also used a florescent bulb and required 6 batteries like the GG:
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Atari+Lynx+Backlight+Replacement/22576
Both the GG and Lynx had a fraction of the GB/GBA's battery life (GG 3-5, Lynx 1 4-5, Lynx II 5-6, GB 15 hours, GBA 15 hours), but I don't know definitively how much of this can be attributed just to the backlight, although I've seen the CCFL bulb often cited as a large contributor.
I see your point. I just can get over the fact that they settled for overexposing games.To be clear, I'm only discussing the comparison to the GG/Atari Lynx being flawed, as for Nintendo not including a light, I still think that cost, design and battery life were the main factors, even if alternative technology was available e.g. the screens on Pocket PCs at the time, which also cost allot more e.g. the $499 Compaq iPaq vs the GBA's $99.99.
I might check that out. thxI'm sure it would look fine with a better LCD. To get an idea of what i mean with trash try the GBA color shader in mGBA and compare. You will see how bad it is.
okay@Creamu I humbly apologize. I didn't notice! Push Notifications don't work in blogs, so I couldn't have known. Thank you for your interest. I will look into them tomorrow.
Okay. But it is important to add that ther is more than 10 year of technical progess inbetween them.
This is HORRIBILE!
Nintendo was able to engineer the virtual boy but couldn't make a portable console in 2001 that does not resort to overexposing the graphics.I'm not sure if you mean '10 years have passed I'm sure this specific method would have improved' or '10 years have passed I'm sure a new technology would have come along to provide a backlight'.
The former I think is a flawed argument, because the issue is whether the approach itself is fundamentally flawed e.g. there will always be a high power draw and increased space required.
The latter is more understandable, since there were different approaches/variations available to provide a light (not necessarily a backlight) around this time, I myself have given a couple, but again cost, design and battery life come into play. I've read that the 2001 'afterburner' mod which gave the GBA a front light, reduced the battery by 25-30%.
No but I would prefer this:Would you prefer this?:
Nintendo was able to engineer the virtual boy but couldn't make a portable console in 2001 that does not resort to overexposing the graphics.
It was a daring design, no one has seen before and since. It surely needed quite a bit of brainpower to make that thing work.Considering how the Virtual Boy turned out, I wouldn't say it helps your argument.