Nintendo - NES Classics, Metroid Prime 2 Movies

An anonymous reader writes "Game Informer has broken the news that there will be four new NES Classic titles released for Game Boy Advancein the States this October 25th: 'The four titles will include Dr. Mario, Metroid, Castlevania, and Zelda 2: The Adventure Of Link. Each title will retail for a suggested price of $19.99.' [We've previously covered the Japanese re-release of some of these.] Also, Game Informer has put up 15 movies from the Metroid Prime 2: Echoes demo disc that ships with the new Metroid Prime GameCube bundle. The movies cover every single second of the disc, from beginning to end."

Comments

Two of these already on GBA

[R2P2]

Metroid is an unlockable on Metroid: Zero Mission (and Metroid Prime on the Cube), and Dr. Mario is unlockable on WarioWare, Inc. as "Dr. Wario". And Nintendo expects people to pay $19.99 for the old games on their own? They really ought to be releasing these "classics" in compilations, not one game to a cartrige.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[fwitness]

Or at a reduced cost. I'm sorry but although I agree these games are 'classic' (even though Zelda 2 is perhaps the worst of the entire series) $10 is more than enough to milk out of me for them.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time these classics come up, the same sentiments are repeated.

If it's too much, why do you care? Do you sit around fuming at how an airplane costs millions of dollars more than it could be sold for? What is the problem? If someone asked for two thousand dollars to buy a piece of tissue paper, you'd just walk by.

The problem is that you want them just enough for the fact that you can't reasonably justify them to be painful. That's what you mean by "milk"... it IS worth it, and you just might buy it. IT's touch and go.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

They also released that Zelda Collection as a promotion through Nintendo Power, which included, Zelda, Zelda 2, Ocarina and Majora's Mask ... whic was about 19.99 dollars less than 19.99. Well minus the cost of the magazine subscription.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[gl4ss]

they know people will go for it.. ..and people will buy those things.

and who are we to judge if they're ripped off.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Metsys]

I think Nintendo found a great way to get people more incentive to buy their games. It comes with the classics as an added feature! After realizing how popular things like MAME are, they probably got some guys to write an emulator which could be used for any GameCube game.

As far as why they won't just put all the roms onto one disc is the same reason why they didn't put all of the NES games in Animal Crossing. They put a lot of the lesser-known ones there and let the classics like Metriod, Mario, etc. be added as a special feature in thier modern sequels.

Yup, it's all about money.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Spleener12]

Those who missed it then can shell out $40 for it at their local Gamestop if it has it in stock. Still better price/stuff ratio, though that doesn't include the value of portability.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[lightspawn]

Metroid is an unlockable on Metroid: Zero Mission (and Metroid Prime on the Cube), and Dr. Mario is unlockable on WarioWare, Inc. as "Dr. Wario". And Nintendo expects people to pay $19.99 for the old games on their own?

Some people bought the classic NES Pac-Man, even though they could have gotten Namco's Pac-Man Collection, which includes it and 3 other pac-games, for $10-$15.

It's possible that some people like these for the retro value. It's also possible that some people (impulse buyers, gift buyers, etc) don't do any kind of research before buying a title, shocking as that may be.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

I care because I care about economics. In a free market (which capitalism is something like), airplanes aren't supposed to cost millions of dollars more than it could be sold for. For a given good, there's a whole array of prices people are willing to pay for the good. With enough competition, the actual company selling the good is forced (from an economic standpoint) to keep the price low which causes a good deal of consumer surplus (the whole "Dutch Auction" which Google's IPO is supposed to do behaves in the same way).

Given that little actual work is done to create these classics, the perceived value by most is less than the $20 charged. However, given there's no one to compete against Nintendo, Nintendo will set the price at $20 to maximize its own profit. This almost certainly isn't maximizing consumer surplus which is a sign that the market is neither as efficient nor as healthy as it could be. Every time the free market fails for whatever reason, it's a time I want to know about. For airplanes, it's a question of barrier to entry, government subsidies (lucrative contracts, mostly), and the general lack of demand to approach the efficiency possible. For NES classics, it's a question of the artificial monopoly of copyright. It's not feasible to fix the airplane problem (well, the contracts could be removed, which would help), but such long copyrights *are* something that can be completely resolved.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

However, given there's no one to compete against Nintendo, Nintendo will set the price at $20 to maximize its own profit.

Sure, noone other than Nintendo is allowed to re-release Classic Nintendo games. But these games are actually competing against the hundreds of titles available from any of the 300 other game developers/publishers.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[galaxy300]

Another common feature of the free market is variable pricing. Sell an item for $20. Everyone who is willing to pay $20 for that item will buy it. Then, lower the price to $15. A whole new group of people will express interest in the item and buy it. Eventually, you'll see the carts used as pack ins and premiums, or being sold at the low low price of 2 for $20.

Nintendo has every right to use their intellectual property in any way they wish. You also have every right not to pay $20 dollars for it.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[galaxy300]

The collection is well worth the $40 bucks. I was unlucky enough to miss Ocarina of Time as my N64 was swiped by my brothers when I went to college. What a great game!

Including Link to the Past would have been nice, as that's my favorite 2D Zelda game. I have it for GBA, but haven't sprung for the Game Boy Player yet.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Right, and there are various games that are good substitutes. But competition between a few or even a lot of good substitutes is at best an oligarchy. Pepsi may be cheaper on the market because there is Coke for sale, but are either as cheap as the hundreds of generic brands? (comprare this analogy to the various Unixes (an oligarchy), Windows (a monopoly which knew to undercut the competition for more market share even if seen as an inferior good), and Linux (a good with many perfect substitutes, many distributors, and a variety of price ranges with many more optimal solutions) (yea, hand to throw this in because it shows why NES classic games sell even through there are free games, yet they're still less expensive than GBA games)) I can't thank of a better example of a perfect substitute of a good than digital copies of a copyrighted work.

If the classic NES games were actually sold at near their production cost, they'd probably diminish the sale of other GBA titles. However with such long copyright terms, we'll never really know.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Over time, a good can lose value because of spoilage. Yes, that's a feature of the free market. A free market means all members are allowed to freely produce a good. The rights Nintendo has over the NES games it created are those which society artificially created to compensate for what who otherwise be a less motivating, free market situation. By analogy, filling a balloon clearly is within scope of the laws of physics, but it is not an example of the law of entropy.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

However with such long copyright terms, we'll never really know.

These games haven't even been in existence as long as the original term for copyrights. You'd be in the same boat even without all those extensions. Maybe you think that would still be too long, but I suppose that's all beside the point.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[galaxy300]

I don't understand your point, exactly. I mean, I get your argument that the extension of copyright laws to near perpetuity may be artificially stifling the market. I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on copyright law - I can see that indefinite extensions and restriction on fair use could certainly stifle the creative community, but on the other hand, Mario, Zelda and Donkey Kong are Nintendo inventions and that should be respected. Anyway, that's not really my point.

Nintendo is simply charging the maximum price that the market will bear, for maximum profit. It's what any company would do - it's certainly not immoral in any way. Once they get everyone who is willing to pay the $20, they'll drop the price by a few more dollars and pick up more customers. That's not spoilage, that's simply stimulating demand through price cuts.

On the other hand, IANAE (I am not an economist) so maybe I am missing some of the finer points of your argument.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[bartok]

How do you unlock Metroid in Metroid Prime?

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Nintendo is simply charging the maximum price that the market will bear, for maximum profit. It's what any company would do - it's certainly not immoral in any way. Once they get everyone who is willing to pay the $20, they'll drop the price by a few more dollars and pick up more customers. That's not spoilage, that's simply stimulating demand through price cuts.

No, not really. You're overlooking the whole point. If Metroid or Legend of Zelda was in the public domain, then *anyone* could stuff Metroid + an emulator onto a gba cart and sell it (well, this assumes that gba carts aren't patented in some way to prevent others from making such a cart, nor is there any exclusive licensing to make sure only Nintendo makes gba carts). In such a situation, Nintendo would be just one of several competitors selling such carts.

Now, this means there'd be competition on who makes the best carts and that's about it. The end result would be while Nintendo could still sell $20 NES Classics, other 3rd parties would surely be selling cheaper versions. Unless Nintendo's carts are really "worth it" or there are enough loyal customers, though, Nintendo would eventually be forced to reduce their price below $20 to get sufficient buyers. A lower cost means more buyers and a greater consumer surplus. It also means higher market efficiency (the price will be closer if not directly on where supply and demand curves cross).

So, it's not amoral for Nintendo to charge $20 given the current circumstances, but there's also nothing moral about having copyright in the first place, let alone how long it is currently. Copyright perturbes the free market. Laissez-faire means lack of government influence both anti and *pro* a business. Really, that's it.

Note: All of this is under the assumption that Nintendo is making money. Monopolies are sometimes in circumstances where the best monopolistic pricing means not making the most money but losing the least money. Only in certain services (say, electrical generation) does it make any sense for such a market to exist (in the example, the positive externalities of power generation; this is one place where it's realized the free market might not be most efficient; I don't think such long copyright terms, though, can be said to be a reasonable reward to the positive externality of works created under copyright).

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

When copyright was first written into law in the US, it took months to years before a book had any chance of distribution. Since then, distribution time has improved considerably. In fact, for various markets, there's very usually a clear cycle upon which it's reasonable to expect a copyrighted work to sell well. After that point, there's tapered marginal returns.

Given this fact, most writers continue to write more works (there's also the intangible fame rewards). As writers have "given up" on a work by this point, it'd seem logical to either have a fixed limit based on industry that's relatively close to the usual cycle time for said industry or just have increasing licensing fees to retain one's copyright each year to discourage holding onto a relatively worthless copyright. In either case, copyright shouldn't be longer than the original term length; most economic and distribution evidence supports a shorter period.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[galaxy300]

OK, thanks for the clarification. I really wasn't thinking about the possibility of the works being in the public domain. That's very much a "what if" scenario; it doesn't seem likely to happen anytime soon.

I'm familliar with laissez-faire, but I'm not sure about the rationale behind your position. Would you consider any kind of copyright term, or are all works immediately considered public domain? What kind of financial support is provided to artists? Is this a society where everything is provided by the state?

I'm not being sarcastic here - I'm actually quite curious about you position.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

A lower cost means more buyers and a greater consumer surplus. It also means higher market efficiency (the price will be closer if not directly on where supply and demand curves cross).

I don't understand what you're saying here. Equilibrium between the supply and demand curves isn't necessarily near the actual cost to produce the good. Without a lot more information, we can't even know for sure whether equilibrium would be higher or lower than the current price.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Sorry, I meant lower price. The supply curve represents the cost to produce. The demand curve represents the value to consumers. Equilibrium (ie, where supply and demand intersect) is definitely near the cost to produce because it's on the supply curve. You're right, though, that "we can't even know for sure whether equilibrium would be higher or lower than the current price", as monopolistic pricing can be above or below the supply curve. But an educated guess would say Nintendo isn't selling NES classics out of the kindness of their heart (ie, at a loss). From that, the only price possible at equilibrium is equal or lower to the current cost.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Well, the "what if" is founded on the problem of the current system: while artists are generally well rewarded for their works, the actual "newness" is the main reason why people can rationalize the cost of a good, especially as things like detail, design, etc can improve with each generation of console; the same holds true for newspaper in the news-ness of it which is new daily, even if the detail and design is the same. The same is harder to say of books and to some extent music (well, all that's not fad-ish), which have a much longer lasting value due to the broadness which doesn't rely on a new factor to work. Please realize this is all more a point of the competition between various things on how to judge price.

Now, given all this, most people (including myself), would consider NES games in the same realm as day old newspapers. Ie, they might be fun to collect, but being charged even remotely today's rate for a game is ludicrous. But, the slow turn-out of games (relative to say newspapers) and the sheer monopolistic power of copyright lets Nintendo do as it pleases. To me, this logically seems a rather large break in how the market system should work.

So, if anything, that's my general problem. I'm not sure if copyrights should exist or not. If copyright didn't exist, there could still be attribution rights, and that may provide the branding necessary to fund an artist regardless. At the same time, it could just cause all copyrighted works to be sold dirt cheap (ie, near the cost of the media). I can even imagine that the low cost would cause an initial flood of works, but at some point the glut caused would mean most publishers wouldn't bother trying to distribute every work possible.

But then, I really think you'd see something like a /. effect. By that, I mean the original publish of a hit would get flooded with orders for relatively cheap media containing the game (so cheap, it's less bother to just buy from them than to get a copy from a friend who you have to trust). Eventually, another publisher will "mirror" the hit and start selling their own copies, but the initial flood might set the precedent on the select few to buy from. Would the artist be adequately motivated? I hope so. If near-nothing funding from advertisement can keep various websites alive, I'm not sure why near-nothing public domain sales couldn't do it too.

So, all this means that I don't think that copyright is as necessary as its made out. It might be a useful way to offer protection to artists, like the minimum wage does to workers, but that's more a point of the ways in which the real world has a time delay in the market (and workers don't haggle for their wage every day like other suppilers do). Ie, copyright of someone nature would be useful.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[geminidomino]

I think you have to beat Metroid Prime and then Gamelink with Fusion. I might have it backwards though. One unlocks the original Metroid, the other lets you play Metroid Prime in the Fusion suit.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Anonymous Coward]

The supply curve represents the cost to produce. The demand curve represents the value to consumers.

Now I see why I wasn't following you. My instructor in college always said the supply curve represented the quantity the producer is willing to supply. I never had the impression that the prices on the supply curve were actually equal to the cost of production. That still doesn't make sense, though, since you couldn't make a profit selling exactly at cost. I only took the required two semesters, though, so maybe I should go read up on it again.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[10101001 10101001]

Well, there's no real guarantee that a company will make any profit, but that all is based on how you define profit. Most companies take the money they make and apply to the cost of paying workers, R&D, and the actual cost of the raw goods to make the good they sell. Since all sane companies will behave this way (the less sane ones will cut R&D costs for a temporary advantage but will fall behind as technology progresses), then everyone is still paid and companies can still advance. There's no real need for excessive amounts of "profit" to pay to share holders or CEOs in such a stable company in a stable market, since such a company is self-reliant.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[OrangeTide]

You can get them on ebay and other auction sites for $30-$35. And with an auction you don't have to worry about it being in stock.

Re:Two of these already on GBA

[Colazar]

You're overlooking the whole point. If Metroid or Legend of Zelda was in the public domain, then *anyone* could stuff Metroid + an emulator onto a gba cart and sell it.

While I happily agree that copyright terms are way too long right now, any copyright length that would have Zelda & Metroid in the public domain would be way too short. It's not fair to the author to go under about 25 years, and I'd argue that somewhere from 30 - 40 years is the sweet spot.

Unless you wanted to carve out a shorter length just for software, which is defensible, but I can't ever see happening.

Expensive, but...

[Hardwyred]

Without trying to sound too much like a fanboy, The classics are the whole reason why I even still own a GBA. I have to admit though, I like what they did with Super Mario Advanced. Rerelease a classic, but give it a few extra tricks to make it shine on the newer hardware.

Re:Expensive, but...

[(trb001)]

There's another way, you know. How many of us owned these 'classic' games when they were released for the NES? I still have the carts sitting in my basement, so I feel absolutely no remorse about downloading the ROMs, and either playing them through an emulator or burning them to a flash cartridge. You can fit around 100 or more classic games on the GBA carts and use PocketNES to run them.

--trb

Think from Nintendo's POV

[Toxygen]

I'll agree with you that I, as a gamer, would very much like to see these classic games be made available on an all-in-one disc or set, but if I were running Nintendo's marketing center I'd be patting myself on the back right about now. They've proven to themselves, and consumers have supported, that classic games will sell in their current format and price point. Nintendo sure may LOOK all cute and cuddly when you sit them next to Microsoft and Sony, but make no mistake, they're a corperation whose main priority is to make money.

If they released those classic games on a single pack or disc, they'd have to accept less money per title for them since there sure isn't triple the number of people who would spend 60$ on a set of classics than there are people who would impulse buy 1 single bit of nostalgia for a 20 sheet.

Re:Think from Nintendo's POV

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the classic games are a great idea. I bought the Legend of Zelda classic because I though there was enough in that game to make it worth $20. Some people just dont have a nintendo anymore and want to enjoy some of their classic games. While they could get them for free on emulation it just isnt the same, plus on the GBA you can pull it out anywhere and play a few levels.

Re:Think from Nintendo's POV

[ZorinLynx]

I wonder if Nintendo is going to start coming down hard on emulation now that their classic games are selling.

I saw a NES emulator for GBA that actually worked pretty well. Of course you need a flash RAM cart to actually use it, but it was spiffy nonetheless.

ROM download sites will probably be getting cease-and-desist orders soon, in any case...

Kind of a steep price

[Aerion]

I have to admit that I bought Super Mario World (Super Mario Advance 2) for GBA, even though it was $30 and it was a rerelease. It had a couple nifty extra features, and I really liked the game on Super Nintendo, which I never owned - I perpetually borrowed it from friends.

It's the kind of thing I'd only do for games that I really liked, and that looked and played pretty well on GBA. Also, actual play time is a plus. The classic Super Nintendo games tend to last longer than the classic NES games (now, if only Square would rerelease FF6, I'd be all set...).

Re:Kind of a steep price

[radixvir]

if only Square would rerelease FF6, I'd be all set

you mean for GBA right? because they did already release it for playstation. however i couldnt recommend it because the loading times were outrageous. there is a translated rom floating around if you want to play it on an emulator though

am I the only person in the worldwho liked ZeldaII

[512k]

I played through the first 2 Zeldas, and for whatever reason, never got into the 3rd one, and none of the others have looked interesting enough to buy a Nintendo console.

Hah

[vasqzr]

PocketPC - $99
1GB memory card - $110
Downloading NES/GB/SNES ROMS - $0

Why doesn't Nintendo release them, say 4 to a cartridge? For $24.99 that would be very fair.

The classic game collections on PSX such as the Namco arcade series, come with multiple games on the CD.

Where's the argument of, "I bought (licensed?) this game on Nintendo when I was 9 years old, why should I have to pay anything more than the cost of the media now?" People use that argument with VHS/DVD, and CD/Tape

On a side note, are these games emulated, or re-written?

Re:Hah

[ImTheDarkcyde]

the jokes on you sucka

go ahead and download a classic, they DONT work on an emulator
the running theory on why they dont work is because it can emulate an emulator, so its probly emulated versions of you classic

though, you can just get an NES emulator instead, haha! (and i suggest using a tapwave rather than pocketpc)

Re:Hah

[FunkSoulBrother]

yeah I had that idea until I decided to actually try and game on my iPaq. It was not designed to be an NES controller at all. The emulation was great, but unless you have a gamepad attachement for your pocketpc, you won't have much fun holding it and playing.

Re:Hah

[tarun713]

The games are emulated. There are no changes to the games except for the resolution change. The NES ran at 256x224, the GBA's resolution is 240x160. Since it's not a straight ratio, the games look somewhat "squished" vertically.

I bought the classic NES Zelda, and it's not very noticeable unless you constantly think about it or have it side by side to the real NES version. The only part where it actually stands out is in text - the text is still very readable, but noticeably distorted.

Re:Hah

[OrangeTide]

As long as people keep shelling out $20-$50 for one game, these companies will continue to only sell one game at a time.

Business isn't about what you want, it's about what people are willing to pay for.

Puzzle Comp for GC!

[kisrael]

I just wish they'd get to a USA release of that Puzzle Collection for GC, with four player Panel de Pon! (Rather it be the less fairyriffic Tetris Attack, but whatever), not to mention Yoshi's Cookie and Dr. Mario.

Seriously, I wonder what the hell the hold up is.

Ah, Castlevania...

[bluemeep]

Now it all becomes clear. Playing it on the NES, the worst you could do was fling the controller. That was only a couple bucks to replace if it broke. So now when today's generation gets to the Grim Reaper and suffers a frustrating defeat, they'll have to shell out for a whole new GBA after their old one shatters against the wall.

Now that's what I call marketing.

Re:Ah, Castlevania...

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahah no shit

Re:Ah, Castlevania...

[Metroid72]

Well, let me spoil Nintendo's hopes to make more money on extra GBAs. To all the Castlevania newbies, before you get to the Grim reaper make sure you have the Cross and the double shot, stand on the right ledge (with Simon's right foot in the air), and pound the s*cker to death!!!!! Oh, BTW, the medusa patter is very easy to figure out. Practice on level II.

Re:Ah, Castlevania...

[Rethcir]

Frickin medusas!!!

I hope they come out with Castlevania 3 on GBA at some point. That was one of the first few games I played on the NES .. I have fond memories of playing it at a demo station at EB or someplace, and don't think I ever beat it. I remember renting it a ton, and getting each of the different guys at different points, and being really awed at the fact that I could get those different guys. (Let me try and remember - grant could climb walls and shit but had a tiny little knife, the mage dude could shoot magic all the way across the screen, and allucard could turn into a bat or something) I don't think I ever beat it. Nobody would confuse the castlevanias with Megaman for example, CV games are tough as hell, especially with the lack of ability to shift your dude's momentum while he's jumping.

Re:Ah, Castlevania...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Holy Water (Firebombs) is actually the best weapon to use against Grim Reaper and Frankenstein. Grim Reaper usually takes about 1-2 seconds to appear, which gives the player just enough time to turn back and toss a firebomb onto the platform where Grim Reaper appears. If timed correctly Grim Reaper will get stuck on the flames and won't launch his scythe attack. Just keep jumping and toss holy water onto the platform until he dies.

Re:Ah, Castlevania...

[Metroid72]

That is actually a good stategy too. One of my buddies was an advocate for this technique, however sometimes he didn't place himself well and if you get hit by the reaper I think it will take 4 bars and send you off position. I suggested the earlier technique because the boomerangs will destroy everything she throws at you.

Re:am I the only person in the worldwho liked Zeld

[yRabbit]

I've played and finished Link to the Past, and I finished Zelda II as well. No, you're not the only person in the world/on slashdot that liked Zelda II. I like it, I enjoy its combat system, hah.

These GBA "rereleases" are kind of overpriced at $19.99, but there are always people who've never seen or experienced the games before, and they would be "new" to them.

30$ - you're lucky

[Anonymous Coward]

In Europe the standard price for GBA games is 49 Euros, which is a lot more...

15 videos to download??

[silicon not in the v]

I just went to that site where they have the 15 movies from the Metroid 2 Echos disc, and they total over 260MB. I hope they have some crazy bandwidth over there after this has now been mentioned on Slashdot.

Legal Move?

[ripnet]

Surely this is just so Nintendo can say that the old games still have commercial value, and hence emulators should be illegal?

Re:Legal Move?

[OrangeTide]

They are illegal even if they don't have "commecial value". If they truely have no commecial value, then in civil court you couldn't be sued for much damages (since you claim it's worth $0). But copyright infringement is going to be tens of thousands of dollars and that's the route a company like this would take if they wanted to get at you for running a ROM site for example.

It'd be nice if they actually updated old games...

[blahplusplus]

... then I could see the justification for a 19.99 price point. This is probably the most frustrating part about re-releases, emulated re-releases or 'ports'. Is that they don't try to enhance the game or add to it to update it for the modern era. This where all game companies could learn from squaresoft. When they released Final Fantasy Origns with the original final fantasy 'updated' and also with the Japanese Final fantasy II /w SNES graphics. FF1 may have been a port of the wondersawn version (I dont know, does someone know?) but at least I know I was getting something then milked to buy anotehr copy of FF1. Since I bought the original for the NES why would I buy it again if there was not something new, different, or significantly modified and updated in the game itself?

I just picked up starfox adventures for 29.99, so if I really wanted these in cart format I'd wait a year or so or until the price drops toless then 10 bucks. Paying for the same games you've already owned/rented in the past is kinda stupid you have to be a real sucker to do so. With emulation widespread on the internet at least videogame companies are getting the message that if they try to milk us we'll milk them right back.

Ooh!

[TomorrowPlusX]

Ooh! That's my birthday! And metroid and Castlevania are two of my favorites.

I might decide to dust off my shoddily afterburner'd GBA ( I performed the operation while half-drunk and watching the absolutely god-awful Dungeons & Dragons "film" )