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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Top 8 most important videogame systems

bouzane on 09 March 2009

I don't agree with the order but you chose the systems well. Personally, I would have included the Dreamcast because of its contributions to online console gaming.



Around the Network
atma998 on 09 March 2009
Pristine20 said:
atma998 said:
Pristine20 said:
RolStoppable said:
Pristine20 said:
RolStoppable said:

What you describe wasn't much of a feat, because the PlayStation was released at a time when the first generation of kids who grew up with videogames was old enough to have a job and therefore an income. It was the natural progress of things.

Additionally, if you compare the PS1 numbers to the NES numbers (difference of 40m), the growth came mainly from Europe and Others (about 32m). Factor in ten years of population growth in the USA, the rise of multiconsole ownership (because the kids who grew up on videogames had an income now) and there wasn't a major expansion, at least not in the sense of growing existing markets which was the main criteria when I compiled this list.

Yes it was. Many grew out of gaming because it was "for kids". Nintendo was still offering the same old which allowed sony to hammer them to death with their "for kids" referendum.

The only difference your additional logic adds is the fact that the "kid Only" logo is stricter in some countries than others. Don't forget that when the nes was around, it was the only viable console but the ps1 had competition from even nintendo itself and was basically the "new kid on the block" competing with established brands. It probably didn't acquire any mario or zelda lovers or old sonic fans so I'd say that more than 50% of ps1 owners were the new adult gamers.

Those who "grew out" of gaming went already to Sega who labeled Nintendo as being "for kids" before Sony. Microsoft is using the same tactic as well.

What is the "kids only" logo?

Many Sega and Nintendo fans bought a PlayStation because the majority of third party games went there. Some even settled for only the PS1 because they weren't allowed to own or couldn't buy more than one console.

You are crazy in assuming that more than 50 % of PS1 owners were adults. The majority of gamers were still kids and teens.

 

I should have written "new adult gamers"in quotes as I menat people interested in primarily adult games not necessarily adults themselves.

Sega was very much like nintendo as their offerings were similar. They never really catered consistently to mature interests till the dreamcast.

''kids only" is a logo nintendo's competition attached to them.

Sure sega fans went PS but I'd argue against nintendo fans because they seem to love nintendos offerings far more than anything a 3rd party can ever offer over and over again. Need proof, just read your own posts on this site.

 

 

 

Hey Pristine, what are you talking about with your ''new adult gamers'' and your ''more than 50% of ps1 owners were the new adult gamers'' ??? Sorry but that seems pure BS. Anybody can throw those kind of numbers without any piece of evidences.

 

 

"New adult gamers" = people lured in/back to experience the type of gaming ps1 offered. 50% was the best number my brain could calculate since nobody tracks this kind of data. If you have the evidence to prove otherwise, I'd like to see it as well.

 

Oh well, I'm sorry to inform you that it doesnt work that way. If you have to put numbers you should be able to back it up with evidences otherwise anybody can say anything.

 



superchunk on 09 March 2009
The Ghost of RubangB said:

Anybody whining about XBox Live needs to remember that Battle.Net has more active users and it's only compatible with 5 games.

 

 

 

My point on xbox live was in specific terms of consoles, not pc or pc related internet gameplay. Obviously xbox was not first to enter internet play, it just made it mandatory for consoles. Now others strive to match its capabilities. That is why suggested xbox be added to the list, probably as #8.



atma998 on 09 March 2009

NES should be #1 because it introduced most of the biggest franchises ever :

Dragon Quest
Final Fantasy
Castlevania
Contra
Mega Man
Metal Gear
Ninja Gaiden
Street Fighter (well kind of...Street Fighter 2010)
Tetris

and of course Super Mario Bros. Metroid, Zelda, Kirby, Wario, Excitebike, Punch-Out! and Yoshi



The Ghost of RubangB on 09 March 2009
superchunk said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:

Anybody whining about XBox Live needs to remember that Battle.Net has more active users and it's only compatible with 5 games.

My point on xbox live was in specific terms of consoles, not pc or pc related internet gameplay. Obviously xbox was not first to enter internet play, it just made it mandatory for consoles. Now others strive to match its capabilities. That is why suggested xbox be added to the list, probably as #8.

In that case, I have 2 points, which have already been stated, so I'll summarize them:

1) DreamCast did it first.

2) If XBox Live was so important, the Wii wouldn't be dominating the 360 with friend codes.  People don't actually care.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Around the Network
The Ghost of RubangB on 09 March 2009
atma998 said:
NES should be #1 because it introduced most of the biggest franchises ever :

Dragon Quest
Final Fantasy
Castlevania
Contra (arcade port)
Mega Man
Metal Gear (MSX port)
Ninja Gaiden (arcade port)
Street Fighter (well kind of...Street Fighter 2010) (sequel to arcade game)
Tetris (Game Boy port)

and of course Super Mario Bros. Metroid, Zelda, Kirby, Wario, Excitebike, Punch-Out! and Yoshi

Wario was from the Game Boy unless you're talking about his NES puzzle game, Punch-Out!! was an arcade game first, and Yoshi is from the SNES, unless you're talking about his NES puzzle game.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Paperdiego on 09 March 2009

ps2 should be in the top five.
wii and ds fall in the right places.
gameboy should be third



hello how are you.

bouzane on 09 March 2009
atma998 said:
NES should be #1 because it introduced most of the biggest franchises ever :

Dragon Quest
Final Fantasy
Castlevania
Contra
Mega Man
Metal Gear
Ninja Gaiden
Street Fighter (well kind of...Street Fighter 2010)
Tetris

and of course Super Mario Bros. Metroid, Zelda, Kirby, Wario, Excitebike, Punch-Out! and Yoshi


You seem to foget that games like Contra and Street Fighter started as arcade games.

EDIT: I see that RubangB beat me to it.

2nd EDIT: the botched NES port of Metal Gear is actually a good point to be made against the NES.

superchunk on 09 March 2009
The Ghost of RubangB said:
superchunk said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:

Anybody whining about XBox Live needs to remember that Battle.Net has more active users and it's only compatible with 5 games.

My point on xbox live was in specific terms of consoles, not pc or pc related internet gameplay. Obviously xbox was not first to enter internet play, it just made it mandatory for consoles. Now others strive to match its capabilities. That is why suggested xbox be added to the list, probably as #8.

In that case, I have 2 points, which have already been stated, so I'll summarize them:

1) DreamCast did it first.

2) If XBox Live was so important, the Wii wouldn't be dominating the 360 with friend codes.  People don't actually care.

1) Actually, SNES satelliteview was first. However, My point was the xbox made it mandatory for home consoles and everyone doesn't strive to copy Dreamcast's version, however, they do with xbox.

2) Everyone hates friendcodes, Wii isn't popular because of its online capabilities. It is popular due to specific games and motion. If the online was more like xbox live, Wii would be nearly perfect AND have many more core gamers loving it.

Every core gamer / teen I know that has switched back to 360 or hardly touches their Wii has its online as the primary reason.

 



Kasz216 on 09 March 2009
atma998 said:
Pristine20 said:
atma998 said:
Pristine20 said:
RolStoppable said:
Pristine20 said:
RolStoppable said:

What you describe wasn't much of a feat, because the PlayStation was released at a time when the first generation of kids who grew up with videogames was old enough to have a job and therefore an income. It was the natural progress of things.

Additionally, if you compare the PS1 numbers to the NES numbers (difference of 40m), the growth came mainly from Europe and Others (about 32m). Factor in ten years of population growth in the USA, the rise of multiconsole ownership (because the kids who grew up on videogames had an income now) and there wasn't a major expansion, at least not in the sense of growing existing markets which was the main criteria when I compiled this list.

Yes it was. Many grew out of gaming because it was "for kids". Nintendo was still offering the same old which allowed sony to hammer them to death with their "for kids" referendum.

The only difference your additional logic adds is the fact that the "kid Only" logo is stricter in some countries than others. Don't forget that when the nes was around, it was the only viable console but the ps1 had competition from even nintendo itself and was basically the "new kid on the block" competing with established brands. It probably didn't acquire any mario or zelda lovers or old sonic fans so I'd say that more than 50% of ps1 owners were the new adult gamers.

Those who "grew out" of gaming went already to Sega who labeled Nintendo as being "for kids" before Sony. Microsoft is using the same tactic as well.

What is the "kids only" logo?

Many Sega and Nintendo fans bought a PlayStation because the majority of third party games went there. Some even settled for only the PS1 because they weren't allowed to own or couldn't buy more than one console.

You are crazy in assuming that more than 50 % of PS1 owners were adults. The majority of gamers were still kids and teens.

 

I should have written "new adult gamers"in quotes as I menat people interested in primarily adult games not necessarily adults themselves.

Sega was very much like nintendo as their offerings were similar. They never really catered consistently to mature interests till the dreamcast.

''kids only" is a logo nintendo's competition attached to them.

Sure sega fans went PS but I'd argue against nintendo fans because they seem to love nintendos offerings far more than anything a 3rd party can ever offer over and over again. Need proof, just read your own posts on this site.

 

 

 

Hey Pristine, what are you talking about with your ''new adult gamers'' and your ''more than 50% of ps1 owners were the new adult gamers'' ??? Sorry but that seems pure BS. Anybody can throw those kind of numbers without any piece of evidences.

 

 

"New adult gamers" = people lured in/back to experience the type of gaming ps1 offered. 50% was the best number my brain could calculate since nobody tracks this kind of data. If you have the evidence to prove otherwise, I'd like to see it as well.

 

Oh well, I'm sorry to inform you that it doesnt work that way. If you have to put numbers you should be able to back it up with evidences otherwise anybody can say anything.

 

Also Sony disagrees.

"Q: Social gaming - from Sony's perspective it's been something the company's pioneered, but how has it squared over time with your hardware offering?

Jamie MacDonald: I think that the thing is, our hardware offerings have a lifecycle of their own. EyeToy, SingStar and Buzz! all appeared on PlayStation 2 relatively... not late, but probably three years after launch. First EyeToy: Play, then a year later SingStar and then a year or two later for Buzz!

So it's all about working out where the demographic is for any particular platform, and our brief is to help the process, whereby we expand the audience for any of our platforms over the lifecycle.

Other studios, other organisations in the US and Japan - who are very good at doing titles which appeal, to use that phrase 'teenage boys in their bedrooms,' - and they're great at that, and absolutely needed. But they come at a certain point in the lifecycle, and we just happen to have found ourselves in a niche really, where we are good or have been good thus far in social gaming.

That's a point in the lifecycle of the platform. Now, for example with PlayStation 2 it's going much younger, so we're still doing social titles for PS2, but it's a much younger audience. For the PlayStation 3 it's the other way around - we have social titles which are appealing to a more adult, sophisticated audience."