/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3178498
It was in many respects to the Master System and Genesis what the Game Boy was to the NES and SNES, although it was a lot further ahead of its time. The Game Boy was significantly less capable than the NES, while the Game Gear was basically a full Sega Master System in a portable form factor, with some hardware enhancements. For performance, comparing the Game Gear to the Master System is more like comparing the Game Boy Color to the NES. Not quite a difference that big, but a fairer comparison than the old GB to the NES.

All that applies to games, too. The game library for the Sega Genesis and MD had a distinct flavor set apart from Nintendo's library. If you like the games for Master System and Genesis, then the Game Gear has a lot of intrinsic appeal because it's got a full library of games like those, scaled down into a portable system.

Simply put, if you don't care for Sega's consoles, the Game Gear isn't going to convert you. If you like Sega, the Game Gear is an obvious choice to own. Because it's such an advanced system, owning one is a bit higher maintenence since most need new capacitors, and there are also mods to address the screen and battery problems.

What you have to understand, and I can't stress it enough, is that the Game Gear was far ahead of its time. It's screen might look like ass by modern standards, but in the early 90s all color LCDs were like that. The fact that Sega even made the thing work and was able to sell it for $150 is an impressive feat for back then.

The biggest reasons the Game Gear wasn't a giant hit are 1) Nintendo was able to sell the Game Boy for $50, and the batteries lasted 4x longer, both of which and that made it a much more attractive deal, and 2) the Game Boy was the established market leader for 5 years, and even as a next-gen handheld the GG was not able to dethrone it. Even so, it managed to find a respectably sized audience in its own right.