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

Forums - Gaming - IGN Top 25 Consoles -- TOP 5......SHOCKING WINNER! (Atari 2600 > PS2)!!

ph4nt on 04 September 2009
RipOff29 said:

Its funny, with all the bitching about the list, the industry would be nothing without the NES, SNES, 2600, PS1, PS2 or whatever, this was missed. "The Magnavox was the very first videogame console ever released". Thats a pretty big oversight, so by virtue of being the first it managed to make #25 on the list behind every other console listed.

If I was to make a biblical comparison, thats like listing Adam as the 25th most influential human in the Bible.

first =/= influential.

I would say people like, oh i dunno, Abraham were more influencial than Adam.

Odyssey was first, yes, but it really didn't do much.

It really took off with Atari.



Around the Network
RipOff29 on 04 September 2009
ph4nt said:
RipOff29 said:

Its funny, with all the bitching about the list, the industry would be nothing without the NES, SNES, 2600, PS1, PS2 or whatever, this was missed. "The Magnavox was the very first videogame console ever released". Thats a pretty big oversight, so by virtue of being the first it managed to make #25 on the list behind every other console listed.

If I was to make a biblical comparison, thats like listing Adam as the 25th most influential human in the Bible.

first =/= influential.

I would say people like, oh i dunno, Abraham were more influencial than Adam.

Odyssey was first, yes, but it really didn't do much.

It really took off with Atari.

Because obviously the early software development strides made didn't transfer forward to future hardware generations.

Because obviously the lessons learnt and the engineers whom had worked on the console didn't transfer to future consoles.

Because obviously the names of all the consoles to come after would be identical without the Odyssey.

Because... its obvious.

 

 



ph4nt on 04 September 2009
RipOff29 said:
ph4nt said:
RipOff29 said:

Its funny, with all the bitching about the list, the industry would be nothing without the NES, SNES, 2600, PS1, PS2 or whatever, this was missed. "The Magnavox was the very first videogame console ever released". Thats a pretty big oversight, so by virtue of being the first it managed to make #25 on the list behind every other console listed.

If I was to make a biblical comparison, thats like listing Adam as the 25th most influential human in the Bible.

first =/= influential.

I would say people like, oh i dunno, Abraham were more influencial than Adam.

Odyssey was first, yes, but it really didn't do much.

It really took off with Atari.

Because obviously the early software development strides made didn't transfer forward to future hardware generations.

Because obviously the lessons learnt and the engineers whom had worked on the console didn't transfer to future consoles.

Because obviously the names of all the consoles to come after would be identical without the Odyssey.

Because... its obvious.

 

 

I'm beginning to think you have no idea what the odyssey really was.

Here watch this video. http://www.gametrailers.com/video/angry-video-screwattack/48329



V-r0cK on 04 September 2009

"Best selling console of all time" =/= #1 loll



Nabraham on 04 September 2009
darthdevidem01 said:
Khuutra said:
darthdevidem01 said:
Khuutra said:
darthdevidem01 said:
EXACTLY as Wii_Master said

IGN's basis for the list is to be frank, muddled, confuzzled & random

this has led to me being disappointed by it.

Atari 2600 is so high as it changed the world....fine

Then why is the fastest selling home console of all time Wii.....in 10th.

why is the console that has brought in more newcomers to gaming than even PS1, PS2, NES even in 10th

They don't like its library or what it stands for?

" IGN has forged a list of the Top 25 Videogame Consoles of All Time, where we have selected and ranked the most influential systems in the history of gaming"

 

http://www.ign.com/top-25-consoles/

_______

its not based on what "they (IGN)" like

Its based on influence & influencial titles

so why is Wii not in the top 5

it has the TOP SELLING GAME EVER!

& why is PS1 not there

Clearly influence is not their only criteria, regardless of whether or not they say it is.

There. How about that.

no that won't do at all

@Kas

I agree, but the Wii has done enough in terms of what they are saying is their criteria to atleast be above "some consoles" which are above it

 

 

 

Dude why don't you quit whining like a bitch and email IGN about it? Holy shit, how many times are you going to make a post about why the Wii and PS1 aren't ranked higher? We get it, your life goal is to make sure everyone devotes themselves to those two consoles. Let it rest man.



Had to change my sig to get some moderator to quit bitching about it......

 

Around the Network
stika on 04 September 2009
Crazymann said:
Well,

Every person weights different factors differently. So why bother complaining?

What if I wanted to organize a list by reliability? Well, 2600 would stomp all over the PS2, so the top 5 would look like this...

1. SNES
2. 2600
3. NES
4. Genesis
5. PS2









* No, I did not look up specific numbers.

PS2 reliable? you gotta be kidding me



ph4nt on 04 September 2009

If it was the top 5 reliable it would be 2600, SNES, N64, Gamecube, and Wii.

NES is the only console that had some troubles due to the unique loading system, but still miles better than other consoles like PS1, PS2, PS3 and xbox 360.



Gilgamesh on 04 September 2009

That list fails so bad



KungKras on 04 September 2009

the top 5 reliable sytems would not include optical based consoles. It would be something like:

1: Game Boy
2: Atari 2600
3: Sega Megadrive
4: Nintendo 64
5: Super Nintendo



I LOVE ICELAND!

sonyfanatic on 04 September 2009

Well then nes deserves it but i grew up with the genesis my top 5 would be SNes,Genesis, nes, ps2, and 2600 just imo but the top 5 was good maybe just the order could be different ;0



Official Member of the Xbox 360 squad!