By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Which is the most significant (important) console in history?

 

Which is the most important console ever?

Atari 2600 119 6.86%
 
NES 806 46.48%
 
SNES 109 6.29%
 
Sega Genesis 25 1.44%
 
N64 54 3.11%
 
PSX 303 17.47%
 
XBox 14 0.81%
 
PS2 225 12.98%
 
XB360 20 1.15%
 
Other - please explain 59 3.40%
 
Total:1,734
Kai_Mao said:
Lawlight said:

Not quite right according to the history of video games - arcades had similar games before Nintendo created those games. Check out Hydlide - came out 1.5 years before Zelda. You can see the inspiration right there.

Nevertheless, Zelda was miles away from what Hydlide was and garnered an even greater legacy than the latter could have ever achieved. I didn't say Zelda was the first open world or adventure game, but the game brought a whole new standard to the genre in the modern console world. The huge overworld map, the music, the enemies, the hidden dungeons and cavs, the items, etc. You're more likely to use Zelda as a reference to making games than Hydlide. And as I said, having characters like Link, Zelda, and Ganon become enduring characters helped.

Yeah, well, Zelda came 1.5 year after - 1.5 year back then was an eternity. And it wasn't released on a popular platform or outside of Japan at release. Imagine if PlayStation existed back then and Hydlide was released on it. Things would have been way different.



Around the Network
Soundwave said:
LMU Uncle Alfred said:

It may have been an inevitability, but somebody had to start the 3D console era first and then run with it.  But more than just the hardware, developers were stepping up their games in other areas as well and consoles and video gaming had started to be looked upon as more mature with the PS1.  Developers wanted to try and see how far they could push everything from the looks of it.  

Story telling was getting better with FFVI, but past some select moments in FFVI out of the games you mentioned, the writing still needed padding out.  There were too many moments that were in a hurry to get to the next scene and rush the narrative along without really having the impact that some of the games on the PS1 had: Xenogears, FF7,9, and Metal Gears Solid come to mind the most.  No Sony didn't invent any of that, but neither did Nintendo (besides maybe Earthbound, but that game didn't bring many people interested into it unfortuantely)  in the SNES days.  That was pretty much just Square.     Then Metal Gear Solid was born and brought a new standard of voice acting that had never been heard before.  We could actually feel heavy emotion now with voice acting rather than hearing stuff like "Set us up the bomb!"  Resident Evil 1, 2 and 3 brought about the survival horror genre and completely redefined horror in video games.

All of this leading up to more cinematic games as the generations went on.  They're the AAA games we see now 3 more generations in from the influence the PS1 brought, take them or leave them.  As far as I can see, those games are going nowhere.  Nintendo still has their market as well, but it's different and usually isn't at the forefront .  The Wii was an explosion of a casual trend that died down, but Nintendo did have an idea they might have been able to run with further. We'll have to wait and see how the Switch does in the long run.

There is quite possibly no Squaresoft, Capcom, or Konami period without an NES. 

Game. 

Over. 

Everything about the modern game business stems from the bedrock established by the NES. 

There is no Final Fantasy VII without a NES coming first. There is no Metal Gear Solid. There is no Playstation as Sony likely wouldn't have been involved in the business period. 

FF7, MGS would've just been on Sega Saturn if there was no Playstation and they'd have been basically the same games. Without an NES, I'm fairly doubtful Squaresoft for example even exists come 1997. Final Fantasy on the NES/Famicom was even titled as such ("final") because they thought it was going to be their last game. 

Without the NES I think what actually would've happened is the game market would've remained largely dormant for many more years until Windows PC revitalized it, but the market you are talking about in this alternate history would be radically different. There would be no Nintendo as you know it, but also no Capcom, Square-Enix, Konami, etc. as you know it either. 

The games and series' that would be popular today would be radically different, you're probably talking abuot a world where people don't know what Final Fantasy or Metal Gear even is and Mario is just some minor character akin to Pac-Man. 

I've already explained to you why you are wrong. Both Konami and Capcom were big in arcade back then. Without the NES, they would have gone to the Master System. Ditto with Final Fantasy.

And without the PS, those games would not be on the Saturn because it was too hard to develop for and Sega was already going down.



Soundwave said:

 Final Fantasy on the NES/Famicom was even titled as such ("final") because they thought it was going to be their last game.  

 

Actually, interesting trivia bit:  that's not why it was called Final.  They settled on wanting the abreviation FF and were looking for words to go with Fantasy.  Their original name was actually "Fighting Fantasy"...but that name was taken by a British set of board games sooooo...they went with the next best F word they had.

 

NO not that F word.



Nuvendil said:
LMU Uncle Alfred said:

 

We have no idea what could have been in the future you're thinking of.  There's too many possibilities.  

No, we can't be sure.  But there's no signs that these developers were going to walk out on their only revenue stream.  And they follow install bases, especially back then.  And pre-FFVII, the N64 was on a dominant run.  So if the PS1 hadn't been there, it's a pretty logical conclusion to reach that devs would have gone with the N64 or the Saturn, depending on the game.

We can't predict with absolute certainty, but we can figure out probabilities decently well.  And I say it is highly probable most of the developments in game design that happened on the PS1 would have come to pass elsewhere as devs were already heading thatw ay and the market was still plenty lucrative.


There's a good chance a western developer may have been in place of Sony.  Would Microsoft have given us a similar future outline if they were at the top in Gen 5 in place of Sony?  Since they were the next major First Party gaming company after Sony it makes sense to imagine MS being in place of them.  One type of game we know they have always struggled with getting sales for is Japanese games.  Maybe that was due to all of the memories gamers associated with the Playstation and Nintendo brand. But it makes sense for games  promoted by an American Console to not do so well in Japan since they tend to shun American consoles as we know in our current time line.  They might have done the same thing even with some big exclusive Japanese 3rd party games on a supposed Gen 5 Xbox.   That Xbox would have sold more with Japanese games, but the western games might have ended up foreshadowing them in US and Europe.    And assuming the Xbox would be the only CD formatted console in this scenario, what's a Japanese 3rd part developer looking to be more ambitious to do?   Maybe stay with the N64, but since this would be only the beginning of an American console taking off and the only CD format around you can bet there will be a lot of Japanese developers risking it.  

 

There's a possibility that Japanese developers would be in a much worse position now if we consider that future and we would have much fewer Japanese developed games. MS doesn't have roots in Japan to promote Japanese games well enough anyways unlike Sony.    Samsung or Toshiba might have given us a similar Sony scenario though, but alas we do know MS was already headed into the gaming industry soon.



Lube Me Up

Soundwave said:
LMU Uncle Alfred said:

It may have been an inevitability, but somebody had to start the 3D console era first and then run with it.  But more than just the hardware, developers were stepping up their games in other areas as well and consoles and video gaming had started to be looked upon as more mature with the PS1.  Developers wanted to try and see how far they could push everything from the looks of it.  

Story telling was getting better with FFVI, but past some select moments in FFVI out of the games you mentioned, the writing still needed padding out.  There were too many moments that were in a hurry to get to the next scene and rush the narrative along without really having the impact that some of the games on the PS1 had: Xenogears, FF7,9, and Metal Gears Solid come to mind the most.  No Sony didn't invent any of that, but neither did Nintendo (besides maybe Earthbound, but that game didn't bring many people interested into it unfortuantely)  in the SNES days.  That was pretty much just Square.     Then Metal Gear Solid was born and brought a new standard of voice acting that had never been heard before.  We could actually feel heavy emotion now with voice acting rather than hearing stuff like "Set us up the bomb!"  Resident Evil 1, 2 and 3 brought about the survival horror genre and completely redefined horror in video games.

All of this leading up to more cinematic games as the generations went on.  They're the AAA games we see now 3 more generations in from the influence the PS1 brought, take them or leave them.  As far as I can see, those games are going nowhere.  Nintendo still has their market as well, but it's different and usually isn't at the forefront .  The Wii was an explosion of a casual trend that died down, but Nintendo did have an idea they might have been able to run with further. We'll have to wait and see how the Switch does in the long run.

There is quite possibly no Squaresoft, Capcom, or Konami period without an NES. 

Game. 

Over. 

Everything about the modern game business stems from the bedrock established by the NES. 

There is no Final Fantasy VII without a NES coming first. There is no Metal Gear Solid. There is no Playstation as Sony likely wouldn't have been involved in the business period. 

FF7, MGS would've just been on Sega Saturn if there was no Playstation and they'd have been basically the same games. Without an NES, I'm fairly doubtful Squaresoft for example even exists come 1997. Final Fantasy on the NES/Famicom was even titled as such ("final") because they thought it was going to be their last game. 

Without the NES I think what actually would've happened is the game market would've remained largely dormant for many more years until Windows PC revitalized it, but the market you are talking about in this alternate history would be radically different. There would be no Nintendo as you know it, but also no Capcom, Square-Enix, Konami, etc. as you know it either. 

The games and series' that would be popular today would be radically different, you're probably talking abuot a world where people don't know what Final Fantasy or Metal Gear even is and Mario is just some minor character akin to Pac-Man. 

I said the NES was the most important, but looking at the industry now the PS1 is definitely a close second.



Lube Me Up

Around the Network
Chris Hu said:
Aeolus451 said:

So what? We're talking about game libaries. I mentioned third party devs several times beforehand too. Also, alot of the games I was looking at were segas. Stop bsing.

Nope none of the games you listed are first party.  Also Captain Planet is not even a Genesis game its a NES game.

Who gives a shit whether it's first party or third party games, It doesn't matter which one it is in the context of our disagreement.  The games are still on the console either way and are considered a part of the console's library. 

As for Captian Planet...

Looks like you're wrong again.



LMU Uncle Alfred said:
Nuvendil said:

No, we can't be sure.  But there's no signs that these developers were going to walk out on their only revenue stream.  And they follow install bases, especially back then.  And pre-FFVII, the N64 was on a dominant run.  So if the PS1 hadn't been there, it's a pretty logical conclusion to reach that devs would have gone with the N64 or the Saturn, depending on the game.

We can't predict with absolute certainty, but we can figure out probabilities decently well.  And I say it is highly probable most of the developments in game design that happened on the PS1 would have come to pass elsewhere as devs were already heading thatw ay and the market was still plenty lucrative.


There's a good chance a western developer may have been in place of Sony.  Would Microsoft have given us a similar future outline if they were at the top in Gen 5 in place of Sony?  Since they were the next major First Party gaming company after Sony it makes sense to imagine MS being in place of them.  One type of game we know they have always struggled with getting sales for is Japanese games.  Maybe that was due to all of the memories gamers associated with the Playstation and Nintendo brand. But it makes sense for games  promoted by an American Console to not do so well in Japan since they tend to shun American consoles as we know in our current time line.  They might have done the same thing even with some big exclusive Japanese 3rd party games on a supposed Gen 5 Xbox.   That Xbox would have sold more with Japanese games, but the western games might have ended up foreshadowing them in US and Europe.    And assuming the Xbox would be the only CD formatted console in this scenario, what's a Japanese 3rd part developer looking to be more ambitious to do?   Maybe stay with the N64, but since this would be only the beginning of an American console taking off and the only CD format around you can bet there will be a lot of Japanese developers risking it.  

 

There's a possibility that Japanese developers would be in a much worse position now if we consider that future and we would have much fewer Japanese developed games. MS doesn't have roots in Japan to promote Japanese games well enough anyways unlike Sony.    Samsung or Toshiba might have given us a similar Sony scenario though, but alas we do know MS was already headed into the gaming industry soon.

It's a fascinating thought.  However, MS entering at Gen 5 I consider unlikely due to their apparent motive.  Now some of this is speculation, but one thing that Microsoft - or rather Bill Gates, who still headed the company at the time - had interest in was the idea of the smart home or connected home, the idea that one day houses will be connected and have many functions controlled centrally.  You would have a central hub or device that did it all, all your multimedia and evenutally other things as well.  Looking at MS's actions with Xbox from beginning to the original Xbone announcement, you can definitely see them pursuing that.  They emphasized their connectivity features early on, put a big emphasis on apps to the point of infamy (hey look, Hulu and Netflix! You can do Hulu and Netflix!), and even promoted social features like Skyp and television stuff.  Microsoft I think entered the mark with the clear vision that consoles would be that hub, that central device of the "smart home".  The watercooler, if you will.  Now we all know how that ended (badly), but I think that was their motive spurred on by the growing ubiquity of consoles (5th gen was a big growth) and the multimedia fuctions starting to show up.  As such, I think the 6th gen is kinda when they were destined to show up, as at the start of gen 5 gaming was thriving and growing but still considered a hobby.  It wasn't until the start of gen 6 that consoles started to become ubiquitous to the point people expected to see one in every home. 

So I doubt MS would have taken Sony's place.  Sony wanted to capitalize on the lucrative market, MS had other motives (I mean shoot, the original Xbox made them quite literally no money).  But could someone else?  Hard to say.  As the gens went on, tech companies became less willing to go up against the big boys so I doubt you would have seen any rampant invasions like in the earlier days. 



Lawlight said:
Kai_Mao said:

Nevertheless, Zelda was miles away from what Hydlide was and garnered an even greater legacy than the latter could have ever achieved. I didn't say Zelda was the first open world or adventure game, but the game brought a whole new standard to the genre in the modern console world. The huge overworld map, the music, the enemies, the hidden dungeons and cavs, the items, etc. You're more likely to use Zelda as a reference to making games than Hydlide. And as I said, having characters like Link, Zelda, and Ganon become enduring characters helped.

Yeah, well, Zelda came 1.5 year after - 1.5 year back then was an eternity. And it wasn't released on a popular platform or outside of Japan at release. Imagine if PlayStation existed back then and Hydlide was released on it. Things would have been way different.

So you're saying PlayStation could've made Hydlide the Zelda game we would be fawning over for 30+ years? Ok then...



Kai_Mao said:
Lawlight said:

Yeah, well, Zelda came 1.5 year after - 1.5 year back then was an eternity. And it wasn't released on a popular platform or outside of Japan at release. Imagine if PlayStation existed back then and Hydlide was released on it. Things would have been way different.

So you're saying PlayStation could've made Hydlide the Zelda game we would be fawning over for 30+ years? Ok then...

You're saying that it's not a possibility had we had the equivalent of the modern PS in the early 80s? Ok then...



Lawlight said:
Kai_Mao said:

So you're saying PlayStation could've made Hydlide the Zelda game we would be fawning over for 30+ years? Ok then...

You're saying that it's not a possibility had we had the equivalent of the modern PS in the early 80s? Ok then...

At an affordable price? Probably not. The console itself was $299 in 1995.

If you're talking about the brand itself. Nintendo was already the big brand in the 80s, heck its arguable its still big now since we're getting theme parks, Mario being in the closing ceremonies of the Olympics, mobile apps, merchandise, etc. Kids and adults in the 80s and 90s would usually say "let's play the Nintendo" or "it's on the Nintendo." Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Star Fox, F-Zero, Yoshi, and Kirby became household names from the 80s to the 90s (not to mention the biggest name alongside Mario and GTA, Pokemon). Sure things have changed in the new century, but you cannot say any other franchise is bigger than Mario and Pokemon besides GTA (which is more likely due to the older teen/young adult crowd).