The Video Game Critic

[QUOTE=Astrosmasher]Atari 2600
Atari 7800
Atari Jaguar
PS1
Xbox
Xbox 360
Xbox 1

Now they have all been beaten by the best UK console in years featuring a new exclusive game pac man.  Yeah the Gamestick... ok... I know I am joking. 

You notice there are no nintendo products there.  The Snes was good butt at was about. The N64 had its moments.  The cube had a lot of very good games. 

Neo geo ... played it in the arcades.  A good machine.[/QUOTE]

The Jaguar? Really?

[QUOTE=ptdebate][QUOTE=Astrosmasher]Atari 2600
Atari 7800
Atari Jaguar
PS1
Xbox
Xbox 360
Xbox 1

Now they have all been beaten by the best UK console in years featuring a new exclusive game pac man.  Yeah the Gamestick... ok... I know I am joking. 

You notice there are no nintendo products there.  The Snes was good but I have always been a huge Atari fan. The N64 had its moments.  The cube had a lot of very good games. 

Neo geo ... played it in the arcades.  A good machine.[/QUOTE] The Jaguar? Really?[/QUOTE]
I adored the Jag.  People criticise it but I had so much fun with that machine.  Plus it had the best Doom on it for the time. 
I loved "where did you learn to fly" Cybermorph.  It was a triumph over adversity. 

[QUOTE=ptdebate][QUOTE=Astrosmasher]Atari 2600
Atari 7800
Atari Jaguar
PS1
Xbox
Xbox 360
Xbox 1

Now they have all been beaten by the best UK console in years featuring a new exclusive game pac man.  Yeah the Gamestick... ok... I know I am joking. 

You notice there are no nintendo products there.  The Snes was good butt at was about. The N64 had its moments.  The cube had a lot of very good games. 

Neo geo ... played it in the arcades.  A good machine.[/QUOTE] The Jaguar? Really?[/QUOTE]

Ever play Tempest 2000 or Aliens vs Predator?  

[QUOTE=Astrosmasher][QUOTE=ptdebate][QUOTE=Astrosmasher]Atari 2600
Atari 7800
Atari Jaguar
PS1
Xbox
Xbox 360
Xbox 1

Now they have all been beaten by the best UK console in years featuring a new exclusive game pac man.  Yeah the Gamestick... ok... I know I am joking. 

You notice there are no nintendo products there.  The Snes was good but I have always been a huge Atari fan. The N64 had its moments.  The cube had a lot of very good games. 

Neo geo ... played it in the arcades.  A good machine.[/QUOTE] The Jaguar? Really?[/QUOTE]
I adored the Jag.  People criticise it but I had so much fun with that machine.  Plus it had the best Doom on it for the time. 
I loved "where did you learn to fly" Cybermorph.  It was a triumph over adversity. [/QUOTE]

I don't hate the Jag. Alien vs Predator was TRULY visionary (and still scares the #$@! out of me today), as was Tempest 2000. And I really lament the fact that the platform didn't fare better. But how can it belong on a list of the BEST of anything? Except perhaps "BEST console that failed," you know? There were no essential fighting, sports, role-playing, simulation, or strategy games. In all honesty, even the 32X taken by itself trumps the Jag (homebrew Jag games not counted). 

Key word in the topic: "Objectively" 

I've counted 2 new votes for the PS2 (from Burk & ptdebate) so, with a whooping 3 votes, the PS2 appears to be running away from the competition for objective "Best Console Ever" (remember, NES, SNES, PS1, and X360 each have one vote).  Again, I have to agree.  I don't think any console has ever had so many good games and, more notably, so many genres being well-represented.  Even for the best consoles, you can often point to certain genres where it was pretty weak (PS1, for example, couldn't compete with the N64 in 3D platformers and FPSes).  But the PS2 seemed to have great games in all genres, and really the FPS genre is the only one where it was lacking (since Xbox had Halo), but even then it still had some decent FPS games.

I'd be interested in the Critic's take here, since, in his critic capacity, he is still constantly playing each system from all the generations on a regular basis.

[QUOTE=Segatarious]It is an easy argument to make. The N64 has some major issues, no doubt, but so does the original Playstation.

Mario 64 and Ocarina are easily the most influential games of that generation, by a huge margin. Now, thrown in Goldeneye 64, which was a major innovation for console FPS, and essentially  built the genre on consoles.

The N64 is literally the Cradle of Civilization of 3D console gaming. Jut about every 3D game we have today, sans racing, RPG and fighting (the last 2 are still a 2D genre, anyways,  for the most part), can be traced back to its roots in Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye.

The most famous PS1 game is FF7 - easily could be done on Super Nintendo, with no compromises to gameplay. The second most famous is Gran Turismo, a realistic car racing game, literally any studio with the time and money can make that game, no imagination to it at all. Whereas Mario 64 was a complete game changing revelation for the entire game industry. There is no comparison.[/QUOTE]

Segatarious, I know no matter what I say, I won't change your mind or your passion for Nintendo consoles.  But I think anyone who is being objective knows that Sony dominated that generation and it sold 100+ million consoles (versus 33 mill. for N64) with good reason. The Playstation didn't just win by having better games -- it also changed the face of gaming as we know it. The reason an adult man like yourself (and myself, and everyone else here) can maybe, possibly, have a video game discussion in public without being considered an immature nerdy Star Trek-loving, comic book-reading manchild loser is thanks to the Sony Playstation. As for the games, I think BanjoPickles summed it up well in his first post. Sure, Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye are all among the top games of that generation, no doubt (although I disagree about "influences"... Goldeneye has been way more influential than Mario 64 and OoT, and the influence of many PS1 games, like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, and Final Fantasy VII, is also far more visible in today's games than Mario 64 and OoT... also, as a console itself, PS1 was far more influential than the N64, I don't think that could be disputed even if the influence of the games could be... and lastly, even if N64 had the most influential games, "most influential games" is often a lot different than "best games").  At the end of the day, though, it's not about one or two games -- it's the fact that the PS1's library as a whole blows the N64's out of the water.  The N64, unfortunately, just didn't get any meaningful support from third parties, and Nintendo was stuck keeping the system afloat on their own.

I owned both consoles in the 90s but, like most people, gravitated more towards the PS1. Here's what I remember most about that generation that N64 owners seem to forget today -- I remember that PS1 owners had tons of good games to play..so many good games that they couldn't keep up with them all. Meanwhile, N64 owners waited months on end for the next game to come out. My classmates talked about Glover, Buck Bumble, and Gex 64 for mooooonths before those games came out. Why? Because that's all they could do -- just sit and wait, and stare at their Nintendo Power magazines and dream of mediocre new games in the distant future, and tout how the graphics were so much better than PS1 (because it was the only winning argument), and then go home and replay Goldeneye and Mario 64 for two years on end while they dreamed that Ocarina of Time would finally come out. PS1 owners didn't have time to sit around all day and dream about junk like Buck Bumble and Superman 64 coming out in 6 months. They had a constant stream of great games to play. That's why objectively the PS1 was the best console of that generation.

[QUOTE=Burk]I will throw out my overall favorite at least. I have to pick the PS2 as the best overall system. Mostly because of SO many good games,amazing graphics that still hold up today,tons of good multi player games( the two control ports are big negative)and loads of quality exclusives. I'm far from a fan boy,but I'm very surprised that this isn't the most common answer. I have played every system extensively from NES to Xbox, so I think I can be fair. PS2 all the way.[/QUOTE]

I will concur with Burk, and toss in that the PS2 is backwards compatible to the PS1 library, relatively reliable hardware for a disc based system, and a highly respected controller. Also, it was the pinnacle of refinement instead of focusing on innovation that comes with some downsides: hard drive optional, online connectivity optional, no firmware updates, set up time measured in minutes from christmas tree to game room tv, etc. The emotion engine inside was the catchiest thing since blast processing.

As to the Playstation bringing gaming out of nerd world, I think that would be coincidental at best. The 90s saw computer culture as a whole become main stream, and one months geek became the next months IT professional. Doom and Tomb Raider, then Myst and even FreeCell and Tetris had all sorts playing and talking about games. Mortal Kombat and Night Trap were discussed by the US Senate because video games were pushing out into the mainstream. By the end of the 90s when everyone had a desktop PC at work and another at home, when dot coms were big news and big business and everyone got AOL CDs in the mail weekly, gaming was quickly becoming widespread. The Playstation was just the dominant console at the time, but Crash Bandicoot had far less to do with being able to talk about games out loud than PCs and the internet did. Being a video gamer continues to become more acceptable too. Heck, nowadays the main character in House of Cards is a gamer.

[QUOTE=PSX][QUOTE=Segatarious]It is an easy argument to make. The N64 has some major issues, no doubt, but so does the original Playstation.

Mario 64 and Ocarina are easily the most influential games of that generation, by a huge margin. Now, thrown in Goldeneye 64, which was a major innovation for console FPS, and essentially  built the genre on consoles.

The N64 is literally the Cradle of Civilization of 3D console gaming. Jut about every 3D game we have today, sans racing, RPG and fighting (the last 2 are still a 2D genre, anyways,  for the most part), can be traced back to its roots in Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye.

The most famous PS1 game is FF7 - easily could be done on Super Nintendo, with no compromises to gameplay. The second most famous is Gran Turismo, a realistic car racing game, literally any studio with the time and money can make that game, no imagination to it at all. Whereas Mario 64 was a complete game changing revelation for the entire game industry. There is no comparison.[/QUOTE]

Segatarious, I know no matter what I say, I won't change your mind or your passion for Nintendo consoles.  But I think anyone who is being objective knows that Sony dominated that generation and it sold 100+ million consoles (versus 33 mill. for N64) with good reason. The Playstation didn't just win by having better games -- it also changed the face of gaming as we know it. The reason an adult man like yourself (and myself, and everyone else here) can maybe, possibly, have a video game discussion in public without being considered an immature nerdy Star Trek-loving, comic book-reading manchild loser is thanks to the Sony Playstation. As for the games, I think BanjoPickles summed it up well in his first post. Sure, Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye are all among the top games of that generation, no doubt (although I disagree about "influences"... Goldeneye has been way more influential than Mario 64 and OoT, and the influence of many PS1 games, like Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, and Final Fantasy VII, is also far more visible in today's games than Mario 64 and OoT... also, as a console itself, PS1 was far more influential than the N64, I don't think that could be disputed even if the influence of the games could be... and lastly, even if N64 had the most influential games, "most influential games" is often a lot different than "best games").  At the end of the day, though, it's not about one or two games -- it's the fact that the PS1's library as a whole blows the N64's out of the water.  The N64, unfortunately, just didn't get any meaningful support from third parties, and Nintendo was stuck keeping the system afloat on their own.

I owned both consoles in the 90s but, like most people, gravitated more towards the PS1. Here's what I remember most about that generation that N64 owners seem to forget today -- I remember that PS1 owners had tons of good games to play..so many good games that they couldn't keep up with them all. Meanwhile, N64 owners waited months on end for the next game to come out. My classmates talked about Glover, Buck Bumble, and Gex 64 for mooooonths before those games came out. Why? Because that's all they could do -- just sit and wait, and stare at their Nintendo Power magazines and dream of mediocre new games in the distant future, and tout how the graphics were so much better than PS1 (because it was the only winning argument), and then go home and replay Goldeneye and Mario 64 for two years on end while they dreamed that Ocarina of Time would finally come out. PS1 owners didn't have time to sit around all day and dream about junk like Buck Bumble and Superman 64 coming out in 6 months. They had a constant stream of great games to play. That's why objectively the PS1 was the best console of that generation.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Although you might be falling into a rabbit hole with Segatarious on this one, the argument for PSX is hard to refute. And although I'm fonder of Nintendo's games and consoles now, it's hard to deny that Sony was the conduit for almost everything that was good about the 5th and 6th generations.

@ PSX - I don't think the FPS genre was lacking on the PS2.  

The PS1 launched with an obsolete controller, and had to abandon it almost immediately. Their follow up controller features analog thumb sticks in a counter intuitive, awkward position, which Sony stubbornly sticks to to this day, the only game company to do so. Sony invented a horrible dpad (that did not infringe on Nintendo patents)  with PS1, and again, stubbornly sticks to it. They are not the best, they just have been, on average, the most popular. It is not an objective indication of quality, but rather a workmanlike effort at mass market manufacturing of generic games, copying competitors innovations, and slapping them slip shod on their own products after the fact. And they continue this to this day, look at the Move.

The greatest 'innovation' of PS1 was disc media. The reason PS1 vaulted to high mainstream success in the second half of its life was, simply - cheap games (most of them shovelware). The drawback for games and gameplay on the PS1 were  terrible draw distances (esp in mutliplayer), long load times,  ugly textures, and overall worse 3D graphics than the N64. The N64 is not without problems, in this area, but it did trump PS1, hands down. That is not objective superiority, it is a cheaper, inferior product.

The other innovation of PS1 was FMV videos, and this led to the worst and most negative trend in gaming - terrible story telling. Anyone who is proud of the level and quality of story telling in gaming is deluding themselves, and should not talk about gaming in public to anyone. The PS1 is not an adult console, it is a man child console. Nintendo is the king of arcade gaming, Sony and later MS are the champions of man child gaming. Simple, dumb, and often violent stories placed around mediocre game play. That is not objective superiority, that is pleasing the masses with lowest common denominator products, coupled with 'cool'/'edgy' corporate branding and advertising.

Quality matter more than quantity. A handful of truly great N64 games - that the PS1 can not match in its entire library in any way, shape, or form - beats out 100's of spin off, mediocre, uninspired mass market titles. Sony-only console owners had to settle for lower quality software that was built on Nintendo made templates. Sony-only owners had to convince themselves that the CG movies in Metal Gear Solid were quality cinema, which is, objectively, a joke.  Go look on Ebay, see which games are more in demand and command far higher prices today. The 'greatest hits' of PS1 are long frogotten and very few care about them. Those 'dead lions' are dogs today.