Rob Browning wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 18:00:53 -0500, "sanjian" <sanjian@widomaker.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Rob Browning wrote:
>>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 14:21:20 -0500, "sanjian"
>>> <sanjian@widomaker.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rob Browning wrote:
>>>>> On 13 Dec 2006 14:13:02 -0700, Eric Schwartz <emschwar@pobox.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  This recent trend of making games for portables which
>>>>>>> don't fit with this philosophy annoys the hell out of me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, it sucks when people make you buy games you don't want to
>>>>>> play.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it sucks when people put games I want to play on systems that
>>>>> they don't belong on.
>>>>
>>>> And how do we know what BELONGS on which system?
>>>
>>> I think I already mentioned that.
>>
>> And your authority is derived from?
>
> The differences between the portable and console markets?  The
> differences between portables and consoles themselves?  Or maybe just
> common sense?  Take your pick.

I've found that many appeals to "common sense" are just like "everybody 
knows."  That is to say, an attempt to cover for utter bullshit.

There is nothing about a portable gaming system that even remotely suggests 
that it cannot be a system for serious games.  The GBA is at least as 
powerful as the SNES, which is what I played Chrono Trigger and FF6 on. 
From what those in this group have said, the DS is as powerful as the PSX, 
which is where FF7 and Xenogears were released.  Hell, I'm currently 
enjoying replaying Lunar on my GBA.  Remember Lunar, commonly considered to 
be one of the best RPGs made?

Other than the size of the system, and the addition of a battery, there is 
no differene between these classics on their original platform, and on the 
portable - except that some of them have been updated to become more modern.

By the next generation of portables, I should be able to replay Eternal 
Arcada - which is tied with the first Grandia as my all-time favorite RPG.

Not bad for a format that RPGs don't BELONG on.