[Original/Best Version of a Game] VS [GBA Version]

[UnscathedFlyingObject]

Compare the original/best version of a game against its GBA port. I'm interested in getting a DS soon ('cause of its backwards comp), so I need unbiased opinions. There's too many a GBA fan (*cought*Gamefaqs*cough*) who would swear a port is accurate when it is crippled by slowdown, lower quality sound, lesser graphics, etc. I'm mostly interested in action games: Beat 'em ups, shmups, run 'n guns, platformers, but if you'd like to, include something else.

Edit. Games I'm interested in: Megaman and Bass, Contra 3, Phalanx, Super Mario Advance (all of them), Double Dragon Advance, River City Ransom, Final Fight One.

PS: this thread is inspired by the Final Fantasy I&II comparison thread.

[it290]

Well, I'll speak for Megaman and Bass and River City Ransom, since I own those two.. also for SMB3, which I've played quite a bit on GBA.

RCR --

Pros:
-Nicer/cleaned up graphics with no flicker, very little slowdown
-Added enemies and AI partners
-Cleaned up tunes, still just as repetitive as the original, tho
-Added moves and items
-Save system
-Tons of options to tweak the game, more stats on your character

Cons:
-No multiplayer (this is the big one)
-Save system is kind of weird
-Some moves are very unbalanced, kind of pointless to build your character up too much because you'll kick everyone's ass with ease

MM&B --

Pros:
-It's in English (although a patch for the SFC ROM is available)
-Very faithful port

Cons:
-Lower quality music
-Screen size is reduced due to lower resolution

SMB3:

Pros:
-Better graphics (bout the same as the All-Stars version)
-'Cleaned up' tunes, although I prefer the originals
-Save system (although All-Stars had this as well)
-You can play the original Mario Bros. game
-Extras via E-Reader

Cons:
-Incredibly annoying and stupid Mario voice clips
-I find this game kind of hard to control, although you can use either the B button or R button to run.

[Thunder Force]

-Incredibly annoying and stupid Mario voice clips

This ruined Super Mario World on GBA for me too. It's just not as much fun playing if you have to turn the sound down to zero.

[dementia]

Earthworm Jim 1 and 2 have lower quality sound, less animation, bugs, and randomly crash. If you want to play this game on the go, pick up a Nomad.

[SFKhoa]

-Incredibly annoying and stupid Mario voice clips

This ruined Super Mario World on GBA for me too. It's just not as much fun playing if you have to turn the sound down to zero.

I felt the same way for the GBA Zelda, let alone the SMB series.

[FatCobra]

PS: this thread is inspired by the Final Fantasy I&II comparison thread.

Why, I'm honored..LOL

Anyway, in my opinion, the GBA ports are usually not worth it. The SNES ports all have low quality sound and slighty worse graphics, and the ones by Nintendo have annoying voice clips. The only thing good about them is that they are portable. The GBA does have plenty of good original titles worth checking out however.

Whatever you do however, don't buy FFI&FFII: Dawn of Souls. It's way too easy, and I HATE easy games.

[it290]

Just another note on a couple of games I haven't played- Contra 3 is supposedly wretched, and DD and Final Fight are both supposed to be rather good.

[Ganelon]

Phantasy Star Collection:

Pros:
-first 3 PS games
-fairly accurate ports
-switching games is quick

Cons:
-imperfect music
-low resolution causing multiple menus to clutter the screen
-save bug in PSI that can just kill your current game
-no PSIV and extras

[dave4shmups]

Wow, this is great thread UFO!

I'm wondering about the Famicom and NES classic games, like the original Legend of Zelda, etc.-are the GBA ports of these games pretty much perfect?

All I've heard about GBA Contra is that its basically a mix between SNES Contra 3 and Genesis Contra Hard Corps, and that this is a problem because the SNES stages look a LOT better then the Genesis stages; making the game as a whole rather akward. Plus the obvious complaints that Konami didn't give GBA owners an original Contra game.

[sethsez]

Whatever you do however, don't buy FFI&FFII: Dawn of Souls. It's way too easy, and I HATE easy games.

Disagree. Final Fantasy is way too easy, but Final Fantasy II is actually playable and enjoyable now. If you're getting it for the first game, go with Origins, but if you're getting it for the second game (which I did since I've already played the original multiple times) get Dawn of Souls.

[LoneSage]

Just another note on a couple of games I haven't played- Contra 3 is supposedly wretched, and DD and Final Fight are both supposed to be rather good.

Double Dragon Advance does indeed rock face. The added cinemas and Mr. Smith "Matrix" lookalikes are welcomed extras that make the game all the more enjoyable. Also, it's a port of the arcade original and not the NES port, if anyone didn't know.

[PaCrappa]

PaCrappa's Quick and Easy Guide to GBA Trickery clearly states the following gems of wisdom:

With occasional exceptions NES stuff upgraded for GBA is usually a lil better than the original. You'd have to be a fool to pay the money Nintendo is asking for the ports of NES games though.

SNES games on the GBA are always weaker than the real deal. It's a fact. No amount of extras is going to make them better than the real. If the GCN had true lo-res output and GBA games didn't look all crappy on the GBP, I might feel differently. But it doesn't, they do and I don't.

So there.

Pa

[BrianC]

Final Fight One is better than the SNES version, though the extras are overpowered versions of two of the normal characters. You aren't forced to use them and nothing changes in the main game when you get them. They do have different dialog for the bosses when you play as them, though. Final Fight One has 6 or 7 enemies on screen with no slowdown and all of the enemies are intact, though two of them have been changed for the US version (they still act the same, though). The music is inferior to the SNES version's music, but this about the only thing inferior. It even has two player, though it requires another cartridge. Compared to the arcade, the GBA version is missing the phone booths, has more stopping points, and inferior sound. However, despite the lame extra characters and the stupid editing of two of the enemies, the game is still a great port of the arcade version.

I like the GBA version of Super Mario World better than the SNES one. The music is slightly inferior and there are those voices (which I didn't mind at all), but the gameplay is intact and the ability to play as a different playing Luigi adds to the game quite a bit. Also, Mario doesn't shrink when he gets hit as firey or cape mario. He goes back to super. This doesn't hurt gameplay at all IMO. The game is still very challenging, especially during the hidden world.

I actually recommend the GB b/w Contra: The Alien Wars over the GBA version. The overhead levels have been translated farily well and the levels are very true to the original. There are some missing mini bosses here and there, but the added difficulty levels and the fact that bombs are intact make up for it IMO. It is missing level 4, though.

[it290]

About the NES Classics series, they're pretty good. The graphics are kind of squished down on all the games (same as in PocketNES, if you've used that), and the sound isn't 100% accurate, but they did add some nice features like saving at any time in Zelda.

[FatCobra]

About the NES Classics series, they're pretty good. The graphics are kind of squished down on all the games (same as in PocketNES, if you've used that), and the sound isn't 100% accurate, but they did add some nice features like saving at any time in Zelda.

IMO, the only NES Classic worth the $20 is Zelda. Especially when you consider that fact that the Zelda cart's battery wasn't the most stable. What I always wanted to know however is that on most NES games where you can save, why it does tell you to hold reset before turning the power off? I always did it out of superstision, however.

[dave4shmups]

"You'd have to be a fool to pay the money Nintendo is asking for the ports of NES games though."

I disagree. First of all, the GBA-SP is a LOT more durable, in terms of hardware, then the NES ever was. Secondly, there are games in the series that are so rare/expensive in their NES formats that their GBA conterparts may end up being cheaper, or at least less expensive. And what about the matter of battery power in the Zelda carts? The original NES Zelda has a save battery that last 10 years; so if you buy a used one, you have absolutely no way of knowing how much life is left in the battery.

Heck, I'd get a GBA-SP and an e-Reader just to play the original Mario Bros. and Donkey Kong 3!

[BrianC]

Also, most of the Classic NES Series games aren't $19.99 anymore. Even Castlevania is $14.99 and some of the games in the first series are even cheaper.

[Ganelon]

I disagree. First of all, the GBA-SP is a LOT more durable, in terms of hardware, then the NES ever was.

True, but you're set if you own a Famicom, which is far more durable than the NES.

[Andi]

Heck, I'd get a GBA-SP and an e-Reader just to play the original Mario Bros. and Donkey Kong 3!

It's good for Nintendo's sake that you're around Dave.

[LoneSage]

The only NES Classics game that I care of and bought was Castlevania, only because it's Castlevania with a save feature. And because it was on sale for $13.44.

[BrianC]

I understand why the Japanese only games didn't make it here, but some of the better games in the Famicom Mini series like Super Mario Bros 2 J, Ganbare Goemon, and Twinbee stayed in Japan. Even some games that were released in the US like Ghosts 'n Goblins and Adventure Island stayed in Japan. I'm hoping Nintendo will announce a third series with them, but it seems unlikely.

[Nei First]

Me being an extreme fan of the original Phantasy star series (especially Phantasy star II), I got the GBA version. I was pleased by how well it handled the game overall. But I would in NO WAY reccomend this unless you can't get hold of the originals, or you just wanna play this on the go.

The save options, and the all important music suffer the most, although there are some graphical flaws. Even some emulators are more accurate than the GBA version.
Still like I said, it's more than good enough, but I'm soooo glad I got the originals and played them the way they were meant to be played.

[BrianC]

I still don't get what the big deal is with the save for the first Phantasy Star in the collection. You can save at any time and the glitch doesn't happen too often. The music may not be dead on, but it's still very good IMO. It's not like the music is completely butchered like in the SEGA Smash Pack for DC. BTW, these games are ports using the GBA hardware for music and sound, not emulations. The graphical flaws don't occur often and mostly affect the original Phantasy Star. Phantasy Star II and Phantasy Star III don't have any save glitches.

[Nei First]

I still don't get what the big deal is with the save for the first Phantasy Star in the collection. You can save at any time and the glitch doesn't happen too often. The music may not be dead on, but it's still very good IMO. It's not like the music is completely butchered like in the SEGA Smash Pack for DC. BTW, these games are ports using the GBA hardware for music and sound, not emulations. The graphical flaws don't occur often and mostly affect the original Phantasy Star. Phantasy Star II and Phantasy Star III don't have any save glitches.

Never said they were emulations, I said some of the emulators are closer to the originals than the GBA Ports. Yes PSII and PSIII don't have save issues, I was more talking about the cut down amount of save space.

Also while the music is for the most part recognisable, it is still very much a cut down compared to the originals, though no where near as bad as the smash pack, still that's down to the GBA hardware.

Like I said, I wouldn't reccommend it, but it's more than good enough for a handheld.

[dave4shmups]

How does Phalanx on the GBA compare to the SNES version?