Azzanation said:
I am talking about the best were on N64 and it turns out I am not the only one to think so either. Having a 90s meta score doesn't tell us much about a game however being critically acclaimed and winning awards were common on the N64. Keep in mind the PS1's also had a major piracy issue which also would have hurt many developers and was a major selling point for the system as well. N64 was not or very little losing money on piracy, cannot say the same for the PS1. So being on the market for twice as long with an added benefit of pirating your games for free and being cheaper overall are not examples I would say a system is more successful. PS1 numbers are not as incident as they look. Besides the N64 was a solid successful console, there is no loser when being successful business wise. Its why I brought up the Volkwagon and Bentley comparison. Selling more does not mean something is better. |
Your Volkswagen and Bentley comparison is flawed ,Bentley was never in competition with Volkswagen and I'm sure that many Volkswagen buyers would say that for them it was a better car based on,sale price fuel,repair and insurance costs and many other factors, now why things like the best are subjective the volkswagen owners at least can demonstrate reasoning better than PS1 was a pirate haven and scores from critics don't tell us much about a game.
Research shows Video games help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot