Of course not! The PS3 and the Vita on almost on equal footing when it comes to the overall power each console has. However, Nintendo's hardware doesn't go for raw power. It won't do anything for you to whine and whine about how "underpowered" the 3DS is. So what if it is? In fact, it is underpowered compared to the PSVita, and that's exactly why your demands are unreasonable. While I could see it as a possibility in the future, it is not possible for Nintendo to do what you are asking them to due to the limited capabilities of their current generation technology.

Playing an NES game on the 3DS is most certainly going to look different on an HD television. For console games, such as the PS1, the difference won't be as dramatic. Sure, the graphics will obviously look blurry and edgy, but it can't possibly compare to the mess 8-bit and 16-bit games will cause on an HD TV. Not only that, but Sony's gaming hardware was always designed with pure, raw graphical power in mind. It was the core of their design. Nintendo's hardware has been built around the experience. It is because each company's ideals are so different that their hardware will come out different. Both PSPs (PSP and Vita) are, as said earlier, almost on-par graphics wise with their console partners. The fact that a game can be developed simultaneously for both PS3 and Vita without significant cuts or alterations to the latter is an example of just how powerful the hardware really is. Nintendo handhelds however, often receive some sort of watered-down version of their console counterpart. Sometimes, they receive a different game entirely. Because of this large differential, things obviously have to be scaled differently for each console.

I am impressed. I figured I would have to purchase them again at full price for these extra features, $1.00-$1.50 is a bargin!

Aren't you still buying that PSP game off the PSN though?

@CaptainMorpheus Um... That makes no sense at all.
I mean, I agree with what Nintendo is doing, but your reasoning...

The idea behind the PSN thing is that one already bought the PSP game on PSN. So now it could be accessed on Vita without cost.

This is a silly comparison. The UMD format is a hardware format that the Vita doesn't support.

The fact that Sony gave people a discount to download the game on PSN is a good deal - Nintendo sure didn't give me a discount on Mario Kart SNES download because I have the original cartridge but it doesn't fit in my Wii U

Nor do I expect Nintendo to offer me discounts on GameCube virtual console games, despite owning some of the games I would inevitably download.

And nor should Nintendo. It was remarkably generous on Sony's part to do that.

This, however, is extorting money out of fans for the simple right to play the thing on the GamePad.

That would be like Sony charging people to play the PS3 games on the Vita... which they don't
That would be like Apple charging iPad and iPhone users to play games on AirPlay on the TV (and that does require additional development work, for the record)... which they don't.

No, this is a uniquely anti-consumer behaviour by Nintendo, and just demonstrates how far back Nintendo is to its competition when it comes to digital.

I really don't understand this logic.

I can't transfer Balloon Pop - which my 3DS runs - to the Wii U, because the 3DS isn't as powerful as the Wii U?

And then, if I could transfer Balloon Pop to the Wii U, it would be ugly. Despite Balloon Pop being available for me to buy on the Wii U right now? And apparently, isn't ugly?

it's the same game.

Nintendo does this not out of choice (okay, maybe a little), but also because they have no choice. All these companies are offering you these discounts and free re-downloads of a game because they can. Nintendo can't.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. The reason you can do this with Apple, Sony, Microsoft, etc, is because they possess an online ecosystem. Their systems were made in the age of the internet. Nintendo's weren't. There is no possible way of tracking this. There were no "downloadable games" in the 80s and 90s. Now, there is absolutely no way Nintendo can track all this. What do you possibly suggest them doing to check and see if you own a certain game? It's not like they can make a separate machine that includes the ports for all their past consoles, which you would then plug in your NES, SNES, N64 games in and have them virtually checked so they could be redownloaded for free. That's impossible and ludicrous.

Think of it like this: if you own Final Fantasy VII in physical form, and you decided to put it in your PS3, would Sony recognize it and let you redownload it for free?

If this is compared to DLC like some of you are claiming, then why not let us play our VC games on the Wii U menu and then "upgrade them with DLC" as we see fit. If they wanna charge us an extra dollar then so be it, but we shouldn't have to play them in Wii Mode. What about WiiWare games? Are those banished to live in Wii Mode for eternity?

Ya, I was thinking that, too. You can't use your PSOne disc on your Vita, you HAVE to buy the PSN version to cross play. I don't mind Nintendo having a game only available on one console at a time. Smash Bros. U and Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate have both consoles in mind at the start, so it's more fluid than just making it playable across different systems. I'd rather have tons of different games, exclusive to that console. Really, there's no point IMO to own a Vita, since I already have a PS3. Having games being playable on both portable and consoles is cool for sure, but that really only demos the hardware itself, not the difference between the 2(PS3, Vita). I think Nintendo's doing the right thing, and so is Sony/Microsoft, they just have a different way of doing things. Nintendo likes to test your patience, while PS/Xbox give to you straight out of the box.

The same game will be scaled differently is what I meant.

@Brooks83 Yeah... I think they're WiiWare for a reason...

However, seeing what Nintendo did with the 3DS eshop, I think they'll (eventually) merge the two together.

Money is the big deal here. They probably charge you for all those extra features on other devices as part of your hardware purchase.

I don't think you understood what Waltz was saying. And the VC was made in the age of the Internet.

I did. He says we can redownload a game we already own for free. I said you can't do that with an NES game because there was never a virtual form (save those on VC) to begin with.

The same game will be scaled differently is what I meant.

That's... not how it has to work. iPhone games don't look ugly when I stream them to me TV via AirPlay.

Nintendo does this not out of choice (okay, maybe a little), but also because they have no choice. All these companies are offering you these discounts and free re-downloads of a game because they can. Nintendo can't.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. The reason you can do this with Apple, Sony, Microsoft, etc, is because they possess an online ecosystem. Their systems were made in the age of the internet. Nintendo's weren't. There is no possible way of tracking this. There were no "downloadable games" in the 80s and 90s. Now, there is absolutely no way Nintendo can track all this. What do you possibly suggest them doing to check and see if you own a certain game? It's not like they can make a separate machine that includes the ports for all their past consoles, which you would then plug in your NES, SNES, N64 games in and have them virtually checked so they could be redownloaded for free. That's impossible and ludicrous.

Think of it like this: if you own Final Fantasy VII in physical form, and you decided to put it in your PS3, would Sony recognize it and let you redownload it for free?

Comprehension fail.

I never suggested that Nintendo should give free downloads to people who own the SNES original.

What?

You don't understand. If I download a PSOne classic to my PS3, I can copy it to my Vita for free.

The physical existence of a copy of the game (before the Internet age, since this is the PSOne) is completely irrelevant.

no, but you are suggesting that people who have purchased it for one console should be able to download a version updated for use on another console for free. It's the same principle, you're paying for the same exact game twice, but this time around it's able to take the fullest advantage of the current console. If you don't want to pay, fine — play it in Wii Mode. No one's forcing you to pay for the Wii U VC version, you're welcome to keep using the Wii VC version of said games on your Wii U.

@Bankai Then what were you trying to say? If I strip away all the layers of my understanding, I see nothing in your argument which contradicts what Nintendo is currently doing.

Sony give you a discount for the UMD's you own.

That's what Nintendo is doing.

Apple doesn't charge for Airplay.

Nintendo doesn't charge you for playing on your GamePad alone.

What is it that you want me to understand? What part of your argument are you trying to enforce? What is it that you think I'm missing?

Gamepad use, more VC options, HD upconversion, 5.1 PCM surround(maybe), Pro controller upgrade, updated online account tracking through eShop instead of Wii Shop=1€/£ or $0.75(maybe)

This doesn't sound bad to me honestly...

And, again, given that I can do exactly what I'm asking for with both Sony and Apple, and Nintendo supposedly "cares about its customers" more than Sony, there's irony in there.

People like to be able to play their stuff on the newest technology. It's clear that there's no technical limitations to being able to play Virtual Console games on your Wii U (unlike the UMDs, where there is a technical limitation preventing you playing them on the Vita), so yes, Nintendo is extorting additional money out of the consumer.

Once again, if Sony's able to give people the ability to download once, play on anything, even offering additional features depending on the platform, then there's no excuse for Nintendo not to follow suit.