Best second console

[The_Liquid_Laser]

curl-6 said:

The_Liquid_Laser said:

That is probabaly true, especially outside of North America and Japan.  SNES games are more like modern games.  SNES games are easier and longer than NES games (as a whole) which makes them more like the games made today.  SNES games are 2D, so they feel a step or two away from modern games, but NES games are like an extra step and that can feel too far removed from modern games.  Also the NES doesn't use any developer tricks (things that subtly make a game easier), and this is great on an old TV, but it can make the NES feel off on an HDTV which generally has lag in it.  NES is more reflex based than any system that came later.

However, a lot of people (probably most people) who played both the NES and SNES when they were new systems prefer the NES.  There is a difference between looking forward (in real time) and looking backward having not lived through it.  There are several ways that NES games are better: 1) action is most intense on NES (less lag and "developer tricks"), 2) more first party games (3 Marios, 2 Zeldas, etc...), 3) light gun games, and 4) most importantly there is a lot more variety and originality on the NES.  One thing that makes a game good (and a console good) is originality.  On the NES, Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Tetris were totally original games (also Mega Man, Castlevania, Final Fantasy, etc...).  Everything was original.  Modern gaming is so far removed from this that it's hard to describe.  Breath of the Wild would have been another good game on the NES, but today it is game of the decade.  The NES was pure originality and today's gaming has almost none.

These are the reasons why the people who experienced the NES in it's prime consider it one of the best (or simply the very best) systems of all time.

SNES are also more like modern games because they learned from the lessons of the 3rd gen and improved upon them; for example there's less cheap and frustrating design choices designed to waste a player's lives/time to extend the game, plus deeper gameplay due to having eight buttons instead of four. 

Few people who don't have childhood nostalgia for the NES would argue it has aged particularly gracefully, whereas SNES's classics are generally considered to have aged extremely well.

This is a very narrow minded view of gaming.  One of the most basic game design principles is "easy to learn, difficult to master".  NES games tend to fit this principle better than SNES games.  A controller with 4 buttons is easier to learn than one with eight.  At the same time "frustrating design choices that waste a player's lives/time" often means the game is actually just difficult to master.  This is assuming we are talking about a tough but fair game like Castlevania.  The best NES games have a better design than the best SNES games.

NES games tend to be better for speed running for this very reason.  If a person has mastered a game, then it's actually pretty short to complete.  Of course it takes hundreds of hours to get that good.  The point of a lot of NES games is to "git gud" instead of just complete the game.  The type of person who likes Dark Souls would probably also like NES games, especially on an original system with a CRT TV.