I understand where McShea is coming from. But it was a "pick your poison scenario" for Nintendo. Either they could innovate and leave DS owners out to dry or they could support the DS by keeping the two screens and not innovating as much. I'm still not sure what the best decision would've been as I'm a big believer in backwards compatibility but also want major advancements in new technology. Either way, Nintendo would've gotten slammed for what they did. The same thing happened to Sony when they obliged to critics asking to reduce ps3 costs but pissed off ps2 owners when they removed backwards compatibility because of it.
Gunmaster51's comments