GBA - A Wasteland For Creativity?

jvm writes "Having been intrigued by heated discussions over licensed games and stagnant creativity in the videogame market, I did some investigation into just how many original titles can be found in the library of games for Nintendo's GameBoy Advance. Depressingly, out of the hundreds of games catalogued, only 9% are not licensed, not sequels, and not remakes of older games. That's fewer than three dozen games, and most of those fall into well-known categories. Graphs and downloadable data are provided for interested readers to do their own examination."

Comments

Reasons why the lack of creativity

[Alpha27]

• Sometimes new things do not get a good chance when they first come out so it becomes more of a cult following. Therefore it's less of a chance of a good sell, and return on investment.
• People like franchises/sequels.
• Some new games are just reinventions of old ideas.
• How new can you get? Many games are similar to each other. We have FPS, RTS, Platformers, RPGs, fighting, sports, card, 2d scrollers, etc. Each genre has their style, and everyone sticks to the style that works.

I'm curious to see a report on other platforms, including SNES, and alot of the older systems. I wouldn't be suprised to see the percentage of new games shrink overtime.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[SmallFurryCreature]

Original games become ever more impossible. There are after all only so many things a person can do that is still fun.

The only thing left is to make hybrids, putting more then one game genre together, or to improve an existing genre.

Is this bad? No. All my favorite games had been done before, just not as well as those games did it.

As for sequels, well it is easy isn't it. Try selling a game to a company it is easier if you can say, hey the previous version did a X amount of sales rather then trying to convince them that yes people will love a fat italian plumber.

So this research falls into the category, "Women buy more dresses then men" AKA the "No shit sherlock" category. Still nice to see someone taking the time to put it all in writing.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[PainKilleR-CE]

I noticed the article also forgot to mention something else that was blatantly obvious:
The top two original titles (Golden Sun and Advanced Wars) both have sequels now.

Of course, he also ignored franchise titles with original gameplay, such as Wario Ware, Inc. which could be viewed as a commentary on the game industry very much in line with the article, if you follow the storyline. It's much easier to simply examine the titles and figure out which are sequels or franchise games than to figure out what titles actually have original gameplay.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[jvmatthe]

The definition of original for this article was chosen because it was unambiguous.

Does a title use a license from a movie, cartoon, etc.? Is it a direct sequel? Does it use properties developed in previous games (i.e. is it a franchise game)? Is it a remake of an earlier game? Is it a retrofit of a game from another platform?

As far as I know, each of those questions can be answered definitively "yes" or "no", without debate. Had I chosen to try to find a definition by which Wario Ware, Inc. was considered original, it would have necessarily included defining original gameplay.

The definition of original gameplay is not something I'm even going to attempt at this point. I admit up front (and even at the end) that there is a weakness with the definition. But to push it further makes it an issue of opinion, and probably an intractable problem (for a single person or even a small group of people). Intractable because one would need to play each game considered in its entirety and make a decision, a subjective one, on whether it had enough original gameplay to be considered original.

Hope that makes the choice of definition a bit more clear. It wasn't that Wario Ware, Inc. was ignored. Quite the opposite: it was considered and then binned appropriately under the working definition.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[PainKilleR-CE]

I realize all of that, and frankly, I don't think it would be possible to increase the percentage of original games all that much by considering them individually, unless there was an extremely loose definition of originality. Of course, the simple fact is that over time the number of original titles by either definition decreases significantly, especially in the US market, regardless of platform. Adding in the consideration of gameplay would, in fact, reduce the number of original titles on most platforms (as was stated in the article at one point, iirc, by pointing out that many of the non-franchise / sequel titles are still derivative works; if it wasn't in the article, then it was immediately pointed out in comments).

I don't have a problem with the article itself, but rather with the conclusions it seems to lead people to draw, which is, as the Slashdot story's title would indicate, that the GBA is a platform without creativity. The reality is that you could find similar percentages on many platforms, that the percentage is probably higher on any platform that is descendant of a previous platform (ie the GBA is descended from the GBC, from the GB; PS2 is descendant of the PS1, Dreamcast is descendant of the Saturn, Genesis, SMS, Gamecube of the N64, SNES, NES), and that Nintendo in particular utilizes their franchises much more heavily than most others (for the good and the bad; Wario Ware and the original Mario Golf, Mario Kart, and many other titles all show the good side of this). The flip side is that titles can be innovative and original within a franchise, because publishers are sometimes willing to take a gamble if there's some medium (the franchise) through which the game is likely to sell.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[StocDred]

What really bothers me about your article is your decision to sensationally title it "Creativity Wasteland," and then throw out games based solely on superficial features. I'm sure it will be a very appealing article for GBA haters, but it proves nothing about the console's abilities and says nothing of any meaning about the game library.

Your definition of "original" is next to useless. WarioWare not considered original simply because it has Wario in it? Ridiculous. Note that Wario is the only Mario-family character in the game (not counting the 10-13 retro minigames themselves); all the other characters are totally new creations. They even gave Wario a new costume for WW.

I understand you had to come up with some kind of definition for "original." Unfortunately the one you chose results in a study that says very little.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[jvmatthe]

If they are "retro minigames", are they really original? (That is, the word "retro" leads one to believe they're games that have been done before.) If they are all packaged in a novel way, does that in itself make the game original? I'm not convinced that there is a workable definition of original that includes gameplay, simply because it's so subjective. (And a point in favor of originality is that they gave Wario a new costume? Ouch. Pretty low standard of innovation, no? ;^)

Again, I chose a definition of originality that can be used to answer "yes" or "no" for each game with almost no ambiguity; had I decided to say what I thought was original, then I immediately opens the definition to attack because it involves one person's opinion.

And, I would point out that the one exception does not completely invalidate the generalization: most of the games that are included under the franchise heading are very much derivative of the previous games. Other than WarioWare, no one has pointed out another example of a game for which the definition clashes with their understanding of "original".

And to address your last comment: if I chose a definition which was dependent upon my own opinion of what made a game original, then people would argue it was useless. If I choose one which is grounded in facts, then it is useless. Shall we then conclude that all definitions are useless? No, rather we work to refine the definition or extend the discussion to the cases in which the given definition fits poorly and why. If it is possible to qualify originality, then one way to work toward that is to propose ideas and refine them.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[MilenCent]

A: The GBA is "a wasteland for creativity" because most of its games are sequels.

B: To clarify the argument, "sequels" here is defined to mean any game in which has a character from a previously-existing game. (Wario in WarioWare, Inc.)

C: Thus, WarioWare is not original, regardless of its considerable originality and the fact that it has almost nothing to do with the "historical" Wario besides using the character. Also, the following games were also not original when released: Mario Bros.(Mario originated in Donkey Kong), the NES versions of Super Mario Bros. or Super Mario Bros. 2, Yoshi's Island for the SNES, Super Mario 64, Zelda: Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask (with its 3-day system) for the N64, or Luigi's Mansion, Metroid Prime, or *Animal Crossing* (all those Mario items and NES games!) for the Gamecube.

D: On the other hand, Spyro and Vexx *are* original.

E: Bleah!

The experiment is baised against companies that use stock characters and franchises, regardless of how originally they are used. In other words, it could not possibly be any more biased against Nintendo, which often does very original games but uses their franchise characters to attract an initial user base. You can bet that if other companies had even a fifth the character portfolio that Nintendo does, they'd be abusing them left and right.

If you define "originality" by an arbitrary standard in order to make the argument better, then you're going to get weird results. Originality, by its very nature, is difficult to pin down.

(Now that I've roundly dissed the article... I do have to say, I visit your site semi-often. In general, pretty cool.)

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[spinkham]

In other words, as in most statistics, his numbers may be be precisely right, and his conculsions can still be precisely useless.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[StocDred]

Once again, you're denigrating gameplay for the sake of fabricating an inflammatory survey. There's over 200 minigames in WarioWare, of which less than 20 could be classified as "retro." My point about Wario's new costume was facetious. Have you even played WarioWare, because it doesn't sound like you know what we're all talking about.

Your definition just eliminates far too many games to be plausible. You'd eliminate Dr. Mario because it mimics the falling block design of Tetris (and features Mario, and was also an NES game.) You'd eliminate Legend of Zelda: Four Swords because it uses art files from A Link to the Past.

And suppose somebody makes a game that is so startingly original, so unbelievably clever, so amazingly fresh... yet bases it graphically on Finding Nemo or SpongeBob or whatever happens to be hot at the time. You'd throw it right out. What if Hideo Kojima sells the Boktai concept to Disney? Does the eReader count as an original enough idea for your study?

You simply can't look at the surface dressings of a game and declare it Not Original. Much less dress those findings in words like "wasteland" and "depressing."

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[jvmatthe]

I think I've admitted in the article that the restrictive definition obviously has a weakness in that it doesn't consider gameplay. In particular I've pointed out that the definition allows a game to be classified original even when the gameplay is original. In a similar vein, you're saying a game can have original gameplay but be based on licensed properties.

I think you and I are talking past each other. I've taken a very restrictive definition of original, so restrictive as to be clear cut. You want a definition of original that includes many games that contain obviously derivative elements and whose qualification as original depends in an essential way on the observer. Obviously these two cannot be reconciled.

I don't think I've denied that the definition has problems, but I'd say your definition (one based on whether a game has original gameplay) has some difficulties since it cannot be practically discussed. There are people, no doubt, who would say Dr. Mario is derivative. Same for Zelda: Four Swords. Would you declare them wrong if you think they're obviously original? How would you prove your point?

If you think this original gameplay effect is so strong that it invalidates the basic drift of the article, then I would encourage you to investigate it for yourself. My own opinion is that you won't find many exceptions to the general rule, and furthermore you'll find several of your choices indefensible against any sizeable group of players.

Email me offline if you'd really like to do that, and we can talk about posting the reply on CG. Barring that, if you want to reply to this post here, I'll be content to let you have the last post in this thread.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[mactari]

But even reusing characters is, in many ways, a cop-out. Same reason so many TV shows start with a known character from another show (you know, Joni loves Chaci (sp?) Syndrome). Perhaps it's a very novel and creative show, but the point is that people are still banking on that name recognition and brand familiarity.

To me, that's by definition not as original as creating a new game from scratch. I'll readily admit that I haven't tried Wario Ware, but just hearing Wario conjures up certain connotations -- and from the description on IGN Pocket, we do have a relatively kid-friendly, arcade action game, as random as it might be.

The bottom line is that Nintendo, even when they have something quite nearly wholly original, has to tag the game with a character simply for name recognition, aka "$$$". This is no Incredible Crisis, for better or worse.

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, what does ole johnC do from QuakeCon?

John Carmack: I thought it would be kind of neat if we took the DOOM renderer, and we had a team take previous games-don't touch the game, just revamp it graphically. Just take Quake II, and just use the DOOM engine to make brand new graphic models and everything. But don't spend time messing with the gameplay because we know that is pretty good. Just release it as Quake II Remix with brand new graphics technology and sell it at a middle-level price instead of a boutique price.

I thought that was a pretty good idea.

Super. As if updating Resident Evil for GameCube wasn't enough, now we might have the exact same freakin' gameplay from Quake 2 back again. Goldeneye, Team Fortress, Action Quake, SOCOM were all great strides over the state of current fps. Be a little adventurous! Least Carmack's fair enough that he's not looking for people to pay more than $20 or so for it.

Even if the point seems so small to you as to be useless, gaming companies simply aren't, as a whole, taking all that many risks. Perhaps the US is so steeped in capitalism that we just don't care any more, but I think the article points out fairly well that there is very little pure originality for pure originality's sake.

Re:Reasons why the lack of creativity

[PainKilleR-CE]

But even reusing characters is, in many ways, a cop-out. Same reason so many TV shows start with a known character from another show (you know, Joni loves Chaci (sp?) Syndrome). Perhaps it's a very novel and creative show, but the point is that people are still banking on that name recognition and brand familiarity.

I'm aware of this, and pretty much stated as much, but again, at least publishers are willing to fund a risky game if it's tied to a franchise. I may not like the fact that this is what it sometimes takes to get original gameplay on the shelves, but I don't avoid a title that is original simply because it's part of a franchise or a sequel.

To me, that's by definition not as original as creating a new game from scratch. I'll readily admit that I haven't tried Wario Ware, but just hearing Wario conjures up certain connotations -- and from the description on IGN Pocket [ign.com], we do have a relatively kid-friendly, arcade action game, as random as it might be.

As I said in an earlier post, Wario Ware is as much a commentary on the state of the game industry as anything else. The entire storyline of the game is that Wario is cashing in on the game industry's popularity by releasing simple, familiar titles. Of course, he does it mostly through ripping off other titles as well as making very simple nonsense titles (of course, my girlfriend is now addicted to Dr. Wario (which is an unlockable game in Wario Ware), as am I, so I may have to buy Dr. Mario just to allow both of us to play).

The bottom line is that Nintendo, even when they have something quite nearly wholly original, has to tag the game with a character simply for name recognition, aka "$$$". This is no Incredible Crisis [ign.com], for better or worse.

I really tend to think that Nintendo tends to innovate within their franchises more than most others. That being said, yes they do tend to rely on their franchises more heavily. At the same time, they also seem to be more willing to let their developers take chances elsewhere (probably especially if it might mean a new franchise/character they can use).

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, what does ole johnC do from QuakeCon [gamespy.com]?

John Carmack: I thought it would be kind of neat if we took the DOOM renderer, and we had a team take previous games-don't touch the game, just revamp it graphically. Just take Quake II, and just use the DOOM engine to make brand new graphic models and everything. But don't spend time messing with the gameplay because we know that is pretty good. Just release it as Quake II Remix with brand new graphics technology and sell it at a middle-level price instead of a boutique price.

I thought that was a pretty good idea.

Carmack also stated that he felt id was basically stuck with the FPS genre because of the team they had, and that he felt pressured to keep releasing Doom, Quake, and Wolfenstein games, although he's already stated that id's next major title (after Doom 3) will be an unrelated title. He said that because of the amount of money that goes into their games (as well as the talent within the company), they are under a certain amount of pressure to basically continue releasing games under well-known brands that are guaranteed to bring back that investment. In a way, he's basically saying that you're only really going to see original games coming from smaller development houses on lower budgets.

Super. As if updating Resident Evil for GameCube wasn't enough, now we might have the exact same freakin' gameplay from Quake 2 back again.

I really don't have any problem with re-releasing (and hopefully updating) games for new consoles, considering that in many cases the Resident Evil games either don't look as they were intended (PS1/2 versions) or are on systems that are no longer supported (Dreamcast). I have problems with the idea that a development house chooses to cash in on the re-releases, though, and I certainly wou

Portability is a big thing

[Metasquares]

While a lot of the games are just ports of other games, the fact that the GBA is portable gives them a renewed appeal. Sequels may also benefit by association. If someone liked playing the original game in a series, they'll probably assume that the GBA sequel is just like the original, but portable.

GBA is a platform, not a list of titles

[truffle]

I bought my GBA so I could get a flash card, and play NES roms. It does that. I'm very happy.

error in original games

[hiroshi912681]

Motocross Maniacs Advance is actually a sequel/remake of an old B&W gameboy game, a great one, mind you. I believe there was a sequel on GBC, also.

Advance Wars is a derivative of (Nectaris) Military Madness... but he fails to realise that Hudson at the time also was making the (X) Wars series, too... like Famicom Wars, Super Famicom Wars, GB Wars, (64 Wars got canceled)... as great as Advance Wars and Advance Wars 2 are, they still are just sequels/remakes.

originality is dead =( oh well, I like retrofits.

We've Got to Support Originality!

[Gothic_Walrus]

One note - Advance Wars is actually a continuation of a previously Japan-only series of Game Boy games.

Unfortunately, originality on all consoles has been vanishing as of late. Publishers make the easy decision and decide to go with what's guaranteed to sell. No one really needs four different NFL games for each season or a tie-in piece of shovelware for every blockbuster movie, but that's what we're getting.

As was noted in the article, the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of us, the gamers. As long as we're content with retreads of old franchises and sequel after sequel to an unexpected hit, that's what we'll receive. It would be nice to see console manufacturers award originality (maybe a price break on the media or the license fees?), but that probably won't happen. Therefore, we, the gamers, need to support originality. We need to buy the games that are different, the ones that take chances. Praising them isn't enough. More often than not, even a mediocre original game is far better than a licensed one. The problem is that we don't do that. We buy the franchises, the crappy licenses (Enter the Matrix, anyone?). We don't support originality, making it an unneeded risk for publishers.

Until we reform our buying habits, nothing is going to change.

Re:We've Got to Support Originality!

[Zed2K]

"One note - Advance Wars is actually a continuation of a previously Japan-only series of Game Boy games."

Advance Wars would have been so much better without the incredibly stupid anime crap. If they would have just stuck with strategy and units and left out all the stupid cutesy characters it would have been a much better game.

Re:We've Got to Support Originality!

[N10sb2002]

So you absolutely can't play it just because it has cartoony characters which absolutely destroys all possibility that it might have good gameplay because we all know that graphics and character models completely outweigh gameplay. I'm sure that you are the same type that disliked Wind Waker because of the cel-shading. If it had realistic graphics they would say "ThIs Gaem IZ teh BeST EVAR!!!!!111" (not aimed at you). Nothing personal though.

Re:We've Got to Support Originality!

[Zed2K]

No. I enjoyed Wind Waker greatly because it was an excellent game and the graphics fit the game. But Advanced Wars with its attempt at being cutesy ruins it for me. A game like that needs to stay away from saturday morning cartoon type atmosphere. The gameplay is fine but the intermissions with the characters is very retarded. If they wanted to express some kind of story they should have done it without the stupid characters and their dumb personalities. Those dumb characters do not complement the gameplay at all and take away from an otherwise good game.

Hollywood

[aliens]

How bout doing a comparison on original movies nowadays? Similar trend without a doubt.

Choosing a GBA game

[MacBrave]

This is a somewhat timely topic for me. This past weekend I took my 6 1/2 year old soon to good 'ole WalMart so he could get a GBA game.
What an exercise in frustration. He would have nothing to do with my and oldest son's (he's 12) suggestion of Golden Sun, Metroid Prime, etc. Instead he was fixated on some Yu-Gi-Oh game, which I eventually gave into. He seems to enjoy it though.

But I completely agree with most of the GBA selection being simply sequels of each other......

This shouldnt surprise you

[Cassius105]

This is to be expected

you cant really expect there to be that much creativity when 90% of the ideas for that technology were used up a decade age

Re:First post

[Inda]

It took you a few minutes to type that? Back to cleaning toilets for you I think.

Meh...

[JMZero]

You can go ahead and buy original games (Fantavision? Blix: The Time Sweeper?), I'll keep buying good games (Metroid Prime, Zelda: TWW, Yoshi's Island GBA).

I think we need to realize a couple things. First, "sequel" doesn't mean "not original". Second, "original" doesn't often mean "good".

The bright side of it

[edwdig]

On the bright side, the GBA is by far the most friendly console/portable ever released for homebrew development. I'm going to ignore the special limited edition PlayStations you could program that were only released in Japan, as you could only run programs that fit in RAM, which made it extremely limited.

For under $100, you can get a flash ROM cartridge and the cable necessary to program it. The GBA is high powered enough that development is usually done in C using GCC rather than in assembly like on most 2d systems. The hardware is very well documented. The system is simple enough that it can be emulated at full speed on any Pentium 3 based system. It's hard to top that for homebrew development.

Re:The bright side of it

[JavaLord]

For under $100, you can get a flash ROM cartridge and the cable necessary to program it.

Can you recommend a reliable place to buy one from?

Re:The bright side of it

[edwdig]

www.success-hk.com

I got a 128megabit Flash2Advance with USB Linker. Works perfectly. Only tested it with my own games, no idea how to use it otherwise.

Re:The bright side of it

[n0wak]

It's hard to top that for homebrew development.

No it's not. Get a GP32.

Not a problem.

[raygundan]

No matter how hard you tried when you were a kid (and believe me, I did) you just couldn't possibly have played ALL the good NES and SNES games out there. I am more than happy to play these "rehashed" games for the first time, and am even happier to see sequels to games I enjoyed.

Re:Not a problem.

[PainKilleR-CE]

you just couldn't possibly have played ALL the good NES and SNES games out there. I am more than happy to play these "rehashed" games for the first time,

I agree whole-heartedly on that point. I didn't even own an SNES, which only makes it better in some cases because I can get games that play on a current console which I never got a chance to play before, even though I would have if I had owned the system they were originally released on.

and am even happier to see sequels to games I enjoyed.

I think that in some cases the sequels on the GBA may stick a bit closer to the earlier titles than I would normally care for, but overall I haven't come upon a truly bad sequel (w/ 2 Castlevania games, Metroid Fusion, Zelda, Golden Sun the Lost Age, Advance Wars 2 (though I didn't get the first Advance Wars), and even a couple of older GameBoy Color titles (and my gf's Pokemon obsession, though she at least only wants one of each generation (she has Red, Gold, and Ruby at this point))).

I can understand the general idea that it's sad to see the majority of the titles are just franchise titles, but I must say that most of the good franchises are still good, and that it's not much different on the home consoles, either.

What about Pokemon

[cpuwizard]

It's only their biggest franchise (and it originated on the Game Boy). If this isn't in the list, then all the data must be suspect.

Wrong expectations

[techstar25]

I was under the impression that the GBA was designed so that you could bring your favorite console games along with you when you travelled. I didn't think the goal was ever to create new games, but was really to bring NES/SNES/PSX games to a portable platform. If you want new games look at the consoles. Obviously that is where the innovation will take place.
I think we should not look at GBA as another independent platform, but more as a supplement to the existing console platforms. This is especially true if you think of it as a supplement to the Gamecube, with all the connectivity features.

Didn't RTFA...

[GeorgeH]

... And this doesn't deal with the statistics of sequels, but Wario Ware for the GBA kicks all sorts of ass. It's the most original game that I've played since Typing of the Dead for the Dreamcast, and I can't recommend it enough.

N stands for creativity!

[ubikkibu]

I'd be more interested to see a similar breakdown for the PS2, XBox, and GC. The true wasteland of creativity is on the big consoles, not the GBA.

The reason I sold my XBox (and never picked up a PS2) is because my personal, subjective analysis is that there is basically no innovation going on there. The original PlayStation pretty much killed it all. Yes, there were great and novel games for every platform, but compare the PS to the Saturn--its original competitor--and later the Dreamcast and N64. Developers took more risks for the DC by far. There are weirder and more original games for the DC that would simply have gotten lost in the shitstorm of Crash Bandicoot clones.

It's undeniable that the vast majority of GBA games are repetitive knockoffs. This is even more true for the big consoles. But so what--I don't buy those titles. There are odder and more creative games available for the GBA, and for the GC. Now that we don't have Sega--the true innovator--doing quite as much, Nintendo stands out as a relative bastion of creativity, compared to the Sony and Microsoft markets. Especially the XBox. It matters nothing if it's sold 15% more units and has half again as many titles out as the GC, if all the games suck. (Does anyone actually play the XBox, or do they just buy them because their buddy told them they'd look cool?)

Anything else any better?

[Chris_Jefferson]

Are you sure that the X-box / PS2 / Gamecube will fair any better? Having a quick look through a list of games I'm not convinced they would.

The GBA Lineup and the overall success of sales...

[ihatesco]

prove that people is so stupid to make e-mail spamming profitable as well.

Ok, that was the flamebait... but think about it... GBA Lineup wouldn't be so full of shit if people didn't go to kwik-e-mart, bought the same buggy platformer with the brand new Disney character that looked like coming out from the Commodore 64 era and then went back to kiwk-e-mart only to buy another platformer based on a Cartoon Network show.

And considering the cost of those fucking games (50 euros here in EU), I wonder if the buyers are little children with little wages, or they demented parents with no knowledge of videogame whatsoever.

I hope when I will be a parent, the situation will be different, because I will not buy my daughter/son a lame game based on a lame franchise.

+ + + +
On the other hand, Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance, and Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow, are really good games, even if the franchise is old.
Sometimes having a franchise breathing beind the back of the developers makes them to publish good games... unless the franchise is Tomb Raider (rotfl).

+ + + +
I can still remember that Simspons episode with Bart being instigated from Donkey Kong, Mario and Sonic to steal Mortal Kombat from the Mall.

Pocket Music

[szyzyg]

One of th more original titles - like a cut down version of Acid on the GBA - sadly not available in north america. Instead we get more crappy platformers.

Poor sample size

[snerdy]

373 titles seems like a very poor sample size.

Re:Poor sample size

[Anonymous Coward]

373 titles seems like a very poor sample size.

How can that be a poor sample when it's all the titles published since the GBA was released?

But this is good.

[bbay]

It's great that the GBA is giving a new generation of gamers the opportunity to play some of the old classic SNES games.

Some of these games (Zelda: A Link to the Past, for example) are very good. Porting them to the GBA makes them attractive even when they can't hold their own against the glitz of modern console titles.

I, for one, am having a great time playing some of my old favorites.

There Must be an Explanation

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the esteemed Dr. Samir Gupta has been doing research on this very topic. I'm eagerly waiting his informed take on originality in the Game Boy Advance's software library.

Because the GB market is saturated.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Gameboy is the easiest and cheapest modern platform to make a game for. Companies that can't make console games (lack of funds, experience, etc) - make handheld games.

As a result there are so many damn games for the system that the market is saturated and it's very hard to stand out. Unless you're Nintendo or have a killer licenced product you can't sell or market anything that's worthwhile making.

So the serious developers have given up on the GBA as a development platform and taken their creativity with them. Larger commercial developers have moved to PS2 / Xbox / PC, smaller developers have moved to the PC / Palm / PocketPC.

The only wildcard there is the PC because it's the most open market for games.

Originality Good, bad sales Bad

[evilhayama]

It seems obvious that a franchise title will have lots of automatic sales, while a truly original title has to work for all it's sales. What's the problem with having a franchise game that's good?

What if the characters in Golden Sun were named Cloud, Aerith and Tifa, and it was Final Golden Fantasy Sun? It would still be a kickass RPG. Or if the minigame title had Wario in it, and was called Wario Ware? err...

How to be original

[ggwfung]

I started as an arcade game freak in the 80's but gradually became more and more disillusioned as time passed. What I found was the replacement of creativity, imagination, and planning with graphics, sound, and simplicity. In other words, the substitution of art with technology.

The ULTIMA series exemplifies this. I acknowledge that a certain amount of processing and grunt power is needed to provide the visual and aural stimulation to the mind. That is why Ultima 1 and 2 are creative gems, but somehow incomplete. Ultima 3, 4, and 5 are great works of art. They will be recognised in a future age as such. The decline sets in with 6 and 7, and then they become little more than eye candy and ear floss. Technology over-ruling creativity.

Maybe NGage will be good for GBA Development

[starX]

Afterall, Nintendo has basically had complete dominance of the handheld market for the last decade or so. Given the poor showing of Gamecube among the other alternatives, one would think that they would do everything they can muster to keep their portable dominance.

And while I wouldn't say that the games for GBA are breath takingly original, I don't think I have thought that of any games I've played since I picked up... uh... damn, I can't remember ever thinking that. Old age and cynicism are starting to get to me.

In any case, the GBA titles that I have actually bought have been pleasing for the most part. I have looked into the homebrew stuff, but ever since Lik Sang lost in court, I have been trying to find another alternative to getting the games onto an actual GBA (I'm open to suggestions).

Not like I'm actually planning on getting an NGage though; unless of course they have some SERIOUSLY impressive titles (which I am equally cynical about).

But seriously, if anyone out there could point me in the direction of a good place to get some stuff to write custom apps to the GBA, I would be much obliged.

That's what Nell said anyway

[N10sb2002]

Some of the interactions should be skipped, I agree. They tell you stuff that you already know. I know that I have to blow up the seam in the pipe, I did this mission in Orange Star. I know what a missile silo is, if I didn't I wouldn't be at this point. What about the things that the characters always say: Andy: That's what Nell said anyway. Sami: Yes, ma'am. Colin: Yes, sir Commander Grit/Olaf.

Re:N stands for creativity?

[Mike Hawk]

Haterade, its not just for breakfast anymore eh?

In general, there has been absolutely nothing creative or innovative in Nintendo's lineup in a long time. I am not saying they are bad games, but I would like you to point out the creativity. I will now set about to point out the utter lack thereof, in brief:

1) Zelda: WW = Zelda: OoT - Horse - difficulty + boat. That is all. The gameplay is the same, if not simplified. Sure its on a boat, but those sequences only serve to make the game arbitrarily longer.
2) Mario Sunshine. Mario 64 + water. Still nothing new here.
3) Mario Golf: TT. Did they even try? It is the EXACT same game as Mario Golf.
4) Eternal Darkness. The way people talk about this game one would think N invented survival horror. So its Resident Evil with more characters. Break it up however you want its still the same game.
5) Metroid Prime. FPS - speed. They took the thrill and speed out of an FPS. Not innovation.
6) Pikmin. Its weird alright. If you call this innovative, I guess you can have it, cause its not a fun game.
7) Animal Crossing. Wow, they re-released an N64 game. Thats about as far removed as creativity as it gets.

I can go on and on, but since your post didn't actually mention any innovation, I'll leave it at that for now.

Now to do the unthinkable and defend M$. Outside of Sega, the only true innovation has been the hard drive. Hate on Blinx all you want, but that is that last game I can think of that tried something truly different. Of course the game didn't end up being very good. So that begs the question, why innovate when it ain't broke?