>>11920714
>how can you possibly justify spending hundreds of dollars
LOL, they are free as air for the non-'tarded

>the weight you're lugging around,
Who is lugging them around? Are you constantly moving your flat screen?

>the tiny size of the screen
You mean the correct aspect ratio for old games?

>the lack of consistency in quality
Don't get a piece of shit, same as modern tvs.

>the lack of guarantee that it won't break within a few days of purchase
These things last longer than the majority of modern tech. I have sets from the 80s working, while ive had modern sets shit out after 5 years and are fragile as fuck.

>in your mind, where is the logic in any of that?
They are free, authentic and accurate and essentially plug n play compared to setting up games for modern displays.

Who else is willing to bet the next game after this from these devs, will be Mario and DK teaming up to fight a Bowser and Rool team up?

>>715548890
Good. I want retro shit to be cheap to buy again and watch resellers get fucked out of their "investments".

>>713850982
I know this is suppose to be a bait thread, but they're not wrong.

I'd rather play 8. I think world is pretty interesting, but it feels like they got hung up at the mechanics protyping stage and didn't know what to do so they pushed what they had through. A simple solution is to just let people pick and play ONLY the track they choose without the inbetween shit that gets old after the first day.

I hope the sexiest outfit for the child, is locked behind two coins you must play anchient retro games to beat that will filter 99% of those who play it.