I primarily deal with pixel-art for 2D games. Usually the palette size limit is a non-issue because a sprite or tile has a smaller number limiting the constituent colors, but I also often find myself wishing that I could just use the entire palette at once, and the 96-color limit isn't enough.
For example, on one of the hardware platforms I deal with, the palette is a fixed 8-bit 3:3:2 color space, and the native sprite format is 8bits/pixel because there's no hardware CLUT and a software CLUT burns too many cycles per pixel (the raster signal is software generated). Thus, different hues are spread about the entire palette, and I must be able to see it all. I realize this particular case is somewhat esoteric, though not entirely so when dealing with embedded systems or certain models of low-cost LCDs, but it does demonstrate a real need for which I can see no other aid than to support larger palettes.
As it seems to me, there doesn't seem to be any technical reason why the 96-color limit was chosen... perhaps it fit nicely with the surrounding GUI options in the "More" view? 256 colors would probably suit most needs, certainly my own, and a 256 color palette is not unwieldy.
Also, when doing pixel-art, I don't typically need the color-wheel or value adjustment spinners, and all I want to see is my palette entries. An alternative view for this would be great as well, and could perhaps be dynamically sized to fit the palette size snugly.
I didn't see this request in the "Frequent Feature Requests" post, though I can't imagine you've never seen a request for more palette colors either. If it hasn't yet been done, what is the argument against increasing the palette size?
