I agree. There's always the cynical argument from more tech-savy gamers that emulators make this feature obsolete. A lot of people argue that, even though illegal, the presence of emulators will make a micro-payment feature destined to fail. At the same time, the majority of the gaming crowd either do not know how to use emulators or cannot procure ROMs as others.

Posted by: Mike on June 6, 2005 09:09 AM

I think that even with the micropayments (assuming they are in fact micro, $1-$5usd) this system would really be wonderful for those of us 'classic' gamers who want to relive some good games, or play a few we never had the chance to back then. There isn't an emulator out there that comes with a control pad and plugs into my TV without any extra work.

Talk about 3d this and high def that, I'm buying the Revolution just see if I can't finaly beat "Bart vs The Space Mutants"

Posted by: evanr on June 6, 2005 11:10 AM

While a few of us old fogies might wax poetic about being able to play MULE or Pirates or any other "ancient" game, I hardly think that most kids today would be in the slightest bit interested. They'd be as likely to watch an old B&W movie, or, heaven forfend, read a book, as play one of those pixelated classics we hold so dear. Esp. if they really do charge for it. One download and payment will make most of the younger crowd reel in horror and demand their money back.

Posted by: Hieronymus on June 6, 2005 12:02 PM

Yes, I considered that point as well, Hieronymus. But then again, Nintendo's remakes of 2D classics for its portable systems have sold exceedingly well -- even with an MSRP of near their original price, for that matter. The popularity of the Famicom Mini line and even the re-releases of Yoshi's Island and Link to the Past for GBA seem to indicate that those titles have staying power. Admittedly, there's a distinct difference between playing on a home entertainment center and a GBASP... but the games are great fun, and i tend to think that's all that matters.

Posted by: ryan on June 6, 2005 12:13 PM

I'll be very curious to see how Nintendo tie together the experience of playing Revolution games versus the huge back-catalogue. They have a great opportunity to present people with gaming history (or at least Nintendo's version) as a continuous timeline, where for the first time the actual hardware doesn't matter. By showing the wide range of excellent, fun games from the NES and SNES alongside the latest games with their fancy graphics, they could pave the way for a more mature attitude towards games, where the presentation serves the gameplay rather than vice-versa...

Well, I can always hope.

Posted by: David on June 6, 2005 04:58 PM

Certainly, redoing the classics for the "smaller" platforms makes excellent sense. But that's a whole lot different than putting them up, head to head, on a modern new console. There's also been plenty of repackaging of the arcade classics before (Midway, etc), but I'm not sure they've set the world on fire, sales-wise. My experience with the 14-20 year old set is admittedly limited, but I just can't see the WWF-entranced set being that keen on playing Dig Dug :)

Posted by: Hieronymus on June 7, 2005 04:07 AM

Having this list is obviously exciting. Some of those classic games will really extend the value of the Revolution, and for some it might be the sole reason for purchase. It will hopefully serve to remind people of the power of NIntendo's first party development group. One question: How are we supposed to play the Super Scope games? For that matter, does anyone have the stomach to play the Scope games?

Posted by: Trainwreck TV on June 7, 2005 09:35 AM

In hindsight, remember when Nintendo announced they were suing people who sold those 300 in 1 things, most likely to be found in mall kiosks? I bet that was why. If they did nothing it would probably hurt their download service, especially if micropayments or something similar are involved.

Posted by: Andrew on June 7, 2005 10:30 AM