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

Forums - Gaming - Best console of the 20th century

 

I think the best is...

NES 9 6.47%
 
Super NES 50 35.97%
 
Megadrive/Genesis 1 0.72%
 
PS1 50 35.97%
 
N64 18 12.95%
 
Saturn 3 2.16%
 
Dreamcast 4 2.88%
 
Other 4 2.88%
 
Total:139
golfgt170 said:

PS1. I still remember the impact i had with Demo1. Coolboarders, Ridge Racer, Tekken, Battle arena toshiden!

Yeah so many great games. Lots of great and new experiences that gen especially when playing with friends.. some nostalgia trip below



Around the Network

XBOX



golfgt170 said:

PS1. I still remember the impact i had with Demo1. Coolboarders, Ridge Racer, Tekken, Battle arena toshiden!

I think I had vol 2 with Tekken 2 (only Jun and Lei playable), Tomb Raider 2, Intelligent Qube (surprisingly fun puzzle game), Parappa The Rapper (Kick, Punch, it's all in the mind!).

Edit: After checking the Tekken 2 demo must have been on another disk.

Last edited by TruckOSaurus - on 05 February 2021

Signature goes here!

Hynad said:
scottslater said:

Not remotely the same thing.

The NES wasn’t the only console being developed during the crash period and released around that time. Those other consoles would still have released had Nintendo made the NES or not.

This is half true.  For example, the Atari 7800 was developed around that time, but then they didn't release it for a while.  They held it back until it was obvious that the NES was successful.  That's because the North American console market was DEAD.  Not in a slump.  DEAD.

Part of why the NES is so important historically is not only the games, but also what Nintendo was doing on the retail side and marketing side.  It took so much effort with retailers and with marketing to revive console gaming that no other console maker was willing to do it.  If the NES had not revived console gaming, then it would have stayed DEAD.  PC gaming would have still been around, yes, but without the NES console gaming would have been considered a fad like the pet rock.



VGChartz_gamrConnect said:

XBOX

That's a 21st century console, released 2001.



Around the Network
The_Liquid_Laser said:
Hynad said:

The NES wasn’t the only console being developed during the crash period and released around that time. Those other consoles would still have released had Nintendo made the NES or not.

This is half true.  For example, the Atari 7800 was developed around that time, but then they didn't release it for a while.  They held it back until it was obvious that the NES was successful.  That's because the North American console market was DEAD.  Not in a slump.  DEAD.

Part of why the NES is so important historically is not only the games, but also what Nintendo was doing on the retail side and marketing side.  It took so much effort with retailers and with marketing to revive console gaming that no other console maker was willing to do it.  If the NES had not revived console gaming, then it would have stayed DEAD.  PC gaming would have still been around, yes, but without the NES console gaming would have been considered a fad like the pet rock.

What you’re saying is an half truth. Part of the truth is that the industry in the US was in a slump, for sure. But in Japan and Europe, it wasn’t going through the same struggles. In case you don’t know, the US isn’t the world, and as such isn’t “The Industry”. And while it is undoubtedly one of the biggest markets right now, the industry at the time was continuing to grow elsewhere, regardless of the situation with the saturation caused by the second gen systems in the US.

The NES did wonders to help make video games what they are now, that goes without saying. But they did not save the industry, as it didn’t need saving. What they did is help the industry make a big leap forward by relying on great game designs that were easy to understand by everyone while being engaging and looked heaps better than the pixel/stick characters from years prior. The console had the right form factor, pricing, and unique software for the US market to take  notice. Add to that what you said about Nintendo handling retailers relations fairly by [among other aspects] not asking them to pay upfront but only for the consoles actually sold, and sure enough, the US side of the market emerged out of its slump.

When originally released in 1983, it was criticized in Japan for being unreliable, and sure enough, it was competing with Sega’s SG-1000, which released the same year, and then the Sega Mark III which came out in 1985 and was then remodeled  and renamed as Master System when it released outside of Japan in 1986. After getting this criticism, Nintendo worked to fix the problems and the NES then achieved success. It is only after the console became a hit in Japan (which is, you know, part of “The Industry”...) that they set their ambition towards the North American market. People at the time were still pretty much into video games, it was a growing hobby, but there were no big killer apps, game were samey, and lacked depth and originality. Super Mario Bros came and became that killer app that the US market was longing for, thanks to the sharply focused design philosophies of Miyamoto. 

So to reiterate, Nintendo rejuvenated the industry and helped it take a big step forward that would probably have taken a few years to be taken if not for Miyamoto’s game output. 

The industry would have continued to grow at a different pace, but it certainly wasn’t going to end if Nintendo hadn’t released the NES. Sega would have still released the SG-1000 and Mark III, and that’s not mentioning Epoch and the other players from that time, who were working to bring the arcades into people’s home.

Last edited by Hynad - on 06 February 2021

iwish i can go back to when resident evil and mgs1 launched.



Ka-pi96 said:
Torpoleon said:

None of the consoles from the 20th century are my favorite (of course, that could be because they are from after my time and I was born in '97), but I would have to say that my favorite of the bunch is the Nintendo 64! Mario 64 & OoT are masterpieces, coupled with great multiplayer games like GoldenEye, MK64, SSB and 3 Mario Parties. It's really unfortunate that Nintendo lost third party support with this system. Just imagine how much it would've sold if we could include games like FF7! It's also a shame we didn't get a new Metroid on the 64, but I still prefer the 64 over the other 20th century consoles.

That would mean they're from before your time, no?

That you think he made an error is crazy talk, the only logical explanation( I was born in 97 ) refers to 1897, and he died before these consoles came out, so we have a ghost who haunts the forums, if not that then he's Doctor Who.

We need a Poll  I vote for Ghost.



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

Hynad said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

This is half true.  For example, the Atari 7800 was developed around that time, but then they didn't release it for a while.  They held it back until it was obvious that the NES was successful.  That's because the North American console market was DEAD.  Not in a slump.  DEAD.

Part of why the NES is so important historically is not only the games, but also what Nintendo was doing on the retail side and marketing side.  It took so much effort with retailers and with marketing to revive console gaming that no other console maker was willing to do it.  If the NES had not revived console gaming, then it would have stayed DEAD.  PC gaming would have still been around, yes, but without the NES console gaming would have been considered a fad like the pet rock.

What you’re saying is an half truth. Part of the truth is that the industry in the US was in a slump, for sure. But in Japan and Europe, it wasn’t going through the same struggles. In case you don’t know, the US isn’t the world, and as such isn’t “The Industry”. And while it is undoubtedly one of the biggest markets right now, the industry at the time was continuing to grow elsewhere, regardless of the situation with the saturation caused by the second gen systems in the US.

The NES did wonders to help make video games what they are now, that goes without saying. But they did not save the industry, as it didn’t need saving. What they did is help the industry make a big leap forward by relying on great game designs that were easy to understand by everyone while being engaging and looked heaps better than the pixel/stick characters from years prior. The console had the right form factor, pricing, and unique software for the US market to take  notice. Add to that what you said about Nintendo handling retailers relations fairly by [among other aspects] not asking them to pay upfront but only for the consoles actually sold, and sure enough, the US side of the market emerged out of its slump.

When originally released in 1983, it was criticized in Japan for being unreliable, and sure enough, it was competing with Sega’s SG-1000, which released the same year, and then the Sega Mark III which came out in 1985 and was then remodeled  and renamed as Master System when it released outside of Japan in 1986. After getting this criticism, Nintendo worked to fix the problems and the NES then achieved success. It is only after the console became a hit in Japan (which is, you know, part of “The Industry”...) that they set their ambition towards the North American market. People at the time were still pretty much into video games, it was a growing hobby, but there were no big killer apps, game were samey, and lacked depth and originality. Super Mario Bros came and became that killer app that the US market was longing for, thanks to the sharply focused design philosophies of Miyamoto. 

So to reiterate, Nintendo rejuvenated the industry and helped it take a big step forward that would probably have taken a few years to be taken if not for Miyamoto’s game output. 

The industry would have continued to grow at a different pace, but it certainly wasn’t going to end if Nintendo hadn’t released the NES. Sega would have still released the SG-1000 and Mark III, and that’s not mentioning Epoch and the other players from that time, who were working to bring the arcades into people’s home.

For the US, Nintendo saves the industry. Look in any historical books. Without Nintendo, you don't have the major  and bigger market for dedicated videogames. Imagine the impact of this overall. 



Agente42 said:
Hynad said:

What you’re saying is an half truth. Part of the truth is that the industry in the US was in a slump, for sure. But in Japan and Europe, it wasn’t going through the same struggles. In case you don’t know, the US isn’t the world, and as such isn’t “The Industry”. And while it is undoubtedly one of the biggest markets right now, the industry at the time was continuing to grow elsewhere, regardless of the situation with the saturation caused by the second gen systems in the US.

The NES did wonders to help make video games what they are now, that goes without saying. But they did not save the industry, as it didn’t need saving. What they did is help the industry make a big leap forward by relying on great game designs that were easy to understand by everyone while being engaging and looked heaps better than the pixel/stick characters from years prior. The console had the right form factor, pricing, and unique software for the US market to take  notice. Add to that what you said about Nintendo handling retailers relations fairly by [among other aspects] not asking them to pay upfront but only for the consoles actually sold, and sure enough, the US side of the market emerged out of its slump.

When originally released in 1983, it was criticized in Japan for being unreliable, and sure enough, it was competing with Sega’s SG-1000, which released the same year, and then the Sega Mark III which came out in 1985 and was then remodeled  and renamed as Master System when it released outside of Japan in 1986. After getting this criticism, Nintendo worked to fix the problems and the NES then achieved success. It is only after the console became a hit in Japan (which is, you know, part of “The Industry”...) that they set their ambition towards the North American market. People at the time were still pretty much into video games, it was a growing hobby, but there were no big killer apps, game were samey, and lacked depth and originality. Super Mario Bros came and became that killer app that the US market was longing for, thanks to the sharply focused design philosophies of Miyamoto. 

So to reiterate, Nintendo rejuvenated the industry and helped it take a big step forward that would probably have taken a few years to be taken if not for Miyamoto’s game output. 

The industry would have continued to grow at a different pace, but it certainly wasn’t going to end if Nintendo hadn’t released the NES. Sega would have still released the SG-1000 and Mark III, and that’s not mentioning Epoch and the other players from that time, who were working to bring the arcades into people’s home.

For Nintendo fans, Nintendo is responsible for everything under the starry sky. Without Nintendo, you don't have the major and bigger market for dedicated videogames. Imagine the impact of this overall. 

Without Nintendo, the US still exists and other players in the industry would have taken that part of the market in its place. What people with stance like yours suggest is that the US could never possibly get a product of interest from any other console maker ever, that the console market is dead and gone for good no matter what without Nintendo, regardless of how it is doing anywhere else in the world.

That’s a myopic stance, one that disregards way too many factors and contributors to make it possible to be taken seriously.

Last edited by Hynad - on 06 February 2021