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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why the NES can't be considered to be the best videogame console ever.

BTFeather55 on 16 April 2009
The Ghost of RubangB said:
I have Popeye for the NES. Before you spout your incorrect comments and assumptions, you can just use Google or Wikipedia or even VGChartz now to look some of these things up.

I was trying to corner you in the Donkey Kong vs. Pitfall argument, where just about everything you said was wrong, but now that you're defending E.T. and the 2600 port of Pac-Man, it's obvious that you're trolling. Thanks for wasting my time.


Arcade games were still strong into the 90's. Just because you didn't like fighting games doesn't mean you get to rewrite history. Street Fighter 2 was one of the most successful arcade games of all time. You're also intentionally downplaying the market crash of '83 because you're pretending to like the games that were major causes of it (E.T. and Pac-Man).

The NES had better original content as well as better arcade ports. When you're not naming arcade ports, you're naming mostly shitty games that ruined the game industry. Atari was to blame. The corporate dooshbags who ousted Bushnell didn't know anything about the industry or quality control, so Atari didn't have any. This is basic video game history.

Nintendo's Seal of Quality was really hard to get. Nintendo actually had quality control. Atari is the reason Nintendo had to rule the industry with an iron fist as they recreated it. If it wasn't for that Seal of Quality and those crazy contracts, we would have had a flood of shitty games, JUST LIKE ATARI DID. And it would have ruined the industry again.

There's a reason why Nintendo wouldn't even let Atari make NES games, so they had to do so under a fake name, Tengen, and make almost all crap games, outside of their illegal Tetris port.

Ugh.

 


     Whether or not there was a NES version of Popeye is immaterial.  And it actually strengthens the point I made in that post that you guys think its alright that the NES had arcade ports while wanting to slight the 2600's library for the fact that most of the greatest arcade games of all time appeared there both first and exclusively in home versions.

      I wasn't defending the 2600 version of Pac-Man, but at least it was a legitimate version and not a bootleg like K.C. Munch whatever.  I will defend Ms. Pac-Man on 2600; however, it was a solid enough arcade port and not available on other systems at that time.

     I'm not naming shitty games.  As for original content  I'm naming classics from Activision that shaped the history of home console gaming that received a review score of 85 from IGN in their last anthology form.  And Activision is still around today with one of the best rated and selling game series on the market.

 



Heavens to Murgatoids.

Around the Network
Phoenix_Wiight on 16 April 2009

i know everyone has different tastes and all, but theres no way the atari was better, ever



Darc Requiem on 16 April 2009

Wow. When I saw the topic creator, something told me to skip this thread. I had to be hard headed though. I want the 10 minutes I wasted reading this thread back. The 2600 was my first console. It was fun for its time but it doesn't begin to approach the NES.



The Ghost of RubangB on 16 April 2009
BTFeather55 said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
I have Popeye for the NES. Before you spout your incorrect comments and assumptions, you can just use Google or Wikipedia or even VGChartz now to look some of these things up.

I was trying to corner you in the Donkey Kong vs. Pitfall argument, where just about everything you said was wrong, but now that you're defending E.T. and the 2600 port of Pac-Man, it's obvious that you're trolling. Thanks for wasting my time.


Arcade games were still strong into the 90's. Just because you didn't like fighting games doesn't mean you get to rewrite history. Street Fighter 2 was one of the most successful arcade games of all time. You're also intentionally downplaying the market crash of '83 because you're pretending to like the games that were major causes of it (E.T. and Pac-Man).

The NES had better original content as well as better arcade ports. When you're not naming arcade ports, you're naming mostly shitty games that ruined the game industry. Atari was to blame. The corporate dooshbags who ousted Bushnell didn't know anything about the industry or quality control, so Atari didn't have any. This is basic video game history.

Nintendo's Seal of Quality was really hard to get. Nintendo actually had quality control. Atari is the reason Nintendo had to rule the industry with an iron fist as they recreated it. If it wasn't for that Seal of Quality and those crazy contracts, we would have had a flood of shitty games, JUST LIKE ATARI DID. And it would have ruined the industry again.

There's a reason why Nintendo wouldn't even let Atari make NES games, so they had to do so under a fake name, Tengen, and make almost all crap games, outside of their illegal Tetris port.

Ugh.

     Whether or not there was a NES version of Popeye is immaterial.  And it actually strengthens the point I made in that post that you guys think its alright that the NES had arcade ports while wanting to slight the 2600's library for the fact that most of the greatest arcade games of all time appeared there both first and exclusively in home versions.

      I wasn't defending the 2600 version of Pac-Man, but at least it was a legitimate version and not a bootleg like K.C. Munch whatever.  I will defend Ms. Pac-Man on 2600; however, it was a solid enough arcade port and not available on other systems at that time.

     I'm not naming shitty games.  As for original content  I'm naming classics from Activision that shaped the history of home console gaming that received a review score of 85 from IGN in their last anthology form.  And Activision is still around today with one of the best rated and selling game series on the market.

Don't say "you guys" and lump us all together as if we're a team.  You are being argued on all fronts by many members, because you are making a plethora of ludicrous claims.  Khuutra was arguing that you were counting too many arcade ports, and he didn't get to re-edit that YubeTube video to take out the arcade ports to make you happy.  He was just sharing a video that highlighted 100 awesome games.  Can you find one for the 2600?  I have never seen a single person argue that the 2600 had over 100 games worth playing.

Either way, I say go for it, count your shitty arcade ports.  NES had better arcade ports and better original content.

I was arguing that Nintendo had better platformers.  I really have no idea why.  It should be obvious.  Everybody knows Nintendo had the best 2-D platformers of all time, and re-invented the genre with SMB1 and 3, and raised the bar yet again with Super Mario World.  When people argue against Nintendo's platforming, they're usually talking about Sonic 2 or Mega Man 2 or the combined efforts of Nintendo and Rare in making Donkey Kong Country.  You're the only guy I see arguing that Pitfall is better than Nintendo platformers.  And everything else you said about Pitfall was wrong.

I corrected you about Popeye not as part of the argument, but to point out that you're on the internet, and can use it to look these things up.  Ya know, so you're not wrong so much in one thread.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

BTFeather55 on 16 April 2009

About ET:
http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/09/in-tokyo-atari-.html#previouspost

One more about the 2600:
http://blog.wired.com/games/2009/03/racing-the-beam.html



Heavens to Murgatoids.

Around the Network
sethnintendo on 16 April 2009

What about ET?? That the Japanese version sold for more than it should? The game still sucks. Go grab a shovel and go to New Mexico since you are the only one who seems to care about that shit game.



Pyramid Head on 16 April 2009
BTFeather55 said:

     Because the Atari 2600, PC Engine, Genesis, SNES, PS1, and PS2 were all better systems.

 

as a guy who owned all of those, youre on crack

if you came up to me when i got my nes and tried to trade me my old 2600 back for it, id have cut your throat

i do agree turbografx rocked and was better than many systems, but not nes

genesis?  please cant beat snes. . .

ps1 drove me to pc gaming

and ps2 is no original xbox

imho



Last year's game of the year turned out to be Silent Hill : Shattered Memories (online GOTY was COD 6).  This year's GOTY leader to me is Heavy Rain.

Wii Friend Code: 4094-4604-1880-6889

BTFeather55 on 16 April 2009

I would think that most people posting on this site are under 30. Therefore, you have candy coated memories of how great the NES was. If you were born in the seventies instead of the eighties and had 2600s in their peak years, you will acknowledge that no home videogame hardware ever passed the 2600 in its prime.



Heavens to Murgatoids.

Khuutra on 16 April 2009
BTFeather55 said:
I would think that most people posting on this site are under 30. Therefore, you have candy coated memories of how great the NES was. If you were born in the seventies instead of the eighties and had 2600s in their peak years, you will acknowledge that no home videogame hardware ever passed the 2600 in its prime.

Age has nothing to do with it. By what metric could you possibly compare Pitfall to Super Mario Bros. 3?



BTFeather55 on 16 April 2009
Pyramid Head said:
BTFeather55 said:

     Because the Atari 2600, PC Engine, Genesis, SNES, PS1, and PS2 were all better systems.

 

as a guy who owned all of those, youre on crack

if you came up to me when i got my nes and tried to trade me my old 2600 back for it, id have cut your throat

i do agree turbografx rocked and was better than many systems, but not nes

genesis?  please cant beat snes. . .

ps1 drove me to pc gaming

and ps2 is no original xbox

imho

 

      Your profile says that you are 30 years old.  That means that to have had the 2600 in its prime that you would have had to have had it when you were between 1 and 3 years old.  Naturally, you would have thought the NES was better because of its improved technical abilities; however, that's a bit like comparing a PS1 to a PS3.  Yeah, games on PS3 look better and can be more complex, but the PS1 was there first and has a greater historical significance + plus more great games that it accumulated during its prime.



Heavens to Murgatoids.