I am a fan of IGN but in all honesty, their whole idea of having a best consoles ever list is pretty silly. Sure there may have been some breakthrough innovations on some of the old machines from 70's and 80's, but to think that people would rather play any of those systems than the current ones is ridiculous (not that they are claiming it as such). Every generation improves, often dramatically, on the previous one, so to say some of the old machines are better than the current ones makes no sense.
I'd still rather pull out an SNES, NES, Balley Astrocade, PS2 or Atari 2600 over a 360 or PS3.
This can actually be backed up by the fact that each of those systems probably has had more time then my 360 or PS3 since i've gotten them.
The SNES and PS2 can be said for the Wii at this point as well.
Advancements in technology don't equal advancements in quality.
I mean hell... were the 3DO, Atari Jaguar or Sega CD a better systems then the NES?
I could be wrong but it sounds like you are confusing "games you enjoy more" and "better console". A console is a piece of technology. When the technology is improved, so is the quality. They can simply do more. You may not enjoy playing them as much, but that doesn't make them inferior.
No. Your confusing what a game console is.
A game console is something that plays games.
Therefore a console is only as good as the games that play it.
BY that logic, since my Wii can not only play Wii and Gamecube games, but also many NES, SNES, and N64 games, it must be the greatest console of all time (since the console is only as good as the games that play it).
Except that those games weren't built for the wii (or with the wii in mind), they were built for the respective consoles.