POLL: Objectively, what is the best console ever? And in each generation?

[Atarifever1]

PSX: I don't think it's all resentment. I never had any horse in that race (I skipped the entire generation) and I just do not like the PS1. It may be hard to believe, but when most of your games look like mud, it's hard to go back to them. The Saturn and N64 are generally brighter and used a colour scheme that has aged better. I don't know about thinking the Jag is better, but I certainly rate the PS1 lowest among its peers. Again, it isn't nostalgia or resentment (I never lost in any way that gen), I think it is a system with mostly ugly games.

[PSX1]

[QUOTE=Atarifever]PSX: I don't think it's all resentment. I never had any horse in that race (I skipped the entire generation) and I just do not like the PS1. It may be hard to believe, but when most of your games look like mud, it's hard to go back to them. The Saturn and N64 are generally brighter and used a colour scheme that has aged better. I don't know about thinking the Jag is better, but I certainly rate the PS1 lowest among its peers. Again, it isn't nostalgia or resentment (I never lost in any way that gen), I think it is a system with mostly ugly games.[/QUOTE]


I actually feel somewhat similar to you, Atarifever, though not quite as strongly.  I know my username might imply some strong positive feelings toward Sony or the PS1, but it's actually just an abbreviated version of a screenname I've used online since the mid-90s.  Nowadays, I enjoy the Saturn most of that generation.  I'd probably still take the PS1 over the N64, but it's very close -- much closer than it was in 1998.  Some PS1 games actually hold up amazingly well (I played Metal Gear Solid to completion again just last fall, for the first time in at least a decade, and it blew me away how good it was... graphics aside, it could easily stack up against any modern game), but I agree that many of the 3D games from the PS1 are not as fun as they once were, due to the poor graphics and controls from that era.  But, it's one thing to think that the Saturn or N64 are better to own now.  What I'm seeing when I read between the lines of certain posts here is resentment that has been harboring and festering since the 90s when the PS1 was clearly the best console to own, by miles, unless you had some deep-seated love of 3D platformers, kart racers, and multiplayer games.  Resentment that I predict stems from being the "minority" back during their school days, having to constantly defend their preferred system over the "majority" who preferred the PS1.  It's like being a Red Sox fan living in New York City -- being constantly around Yankees fans, it's inevitable that you'll end up hating the Yankees even more than if you lived in Boston.  After all, video games are a common topic during lunch, recess, and other downtime during school, so these "console war" debates are commonplace.  So, in the cases I'm referring to, it's existed since the late-90s, it's not a dislike that developed as the system aged.  I'm no psychologist, of course, but to me it's hard to miss.  And I don't mean that its everyone who says something bad about the PS1-- I think when you scroll through the posts you know which I mean.  It's not a bad thing I guess; to me it's more just an interesting observation of human nature.

[Sut1]

It's a strange phenomenon a very similar thing happened with the Call of Duty games and the Wii. Soon as something hits the mass mainstream there is a tendency to reject the popular culture as some people like to be a minority and will defend that to the hilt.
Looking at other media (in this case music) a similar thing happened with REM soon as they achieved mass market success with Automatic For The People long term followers accused them of selling out.
Human nature - it's not always logical or objective.

[Segatarious1]

[QUOTE=PSX]Boy, if this topic has taught me anything, it's that there sure is still a lot of lingering animosity toward the original Sony Playstation.  Is it some sort of anti-bully defense mechanism?  (i.e., the competition gets crushed by the new kid in town, so all the N64, Sega, Jaguar, and 3DO owners spend the rest of their existence hating the "bully" that ruined 5 years of their lives and stole all the good games that were supposed to be on their systems).  Or is it just part of human nature-- our natural tendency to be jealous when "the other team" is dominant?  (i.e., like how all the non-Cowboys fans hated the Cowboys in the early 90s for winning all the time, or the Yankees in the late 90s, or all the other sports dynasties in history that people hate just because they always win).

And it's not even a dislike for a legitimate reason.. you can easily read between the lines in the anti-PS1 posts here and see that it's pure resentment, plain and simple.[/QUOTE]

I do not have any resentment toward PS1.

All the flaws that I have listed are there, and any objecticve perosn who plays the PS1 today will see them.

The N64 has serious flaws as well. However, the best of the best on N64 are far superior to the best of the best on PS1.

Sony to me, has always been generic gaming. Look at the symbols on your controller - circle, square, triangle, etc. That is not resentment.  Sony made a console that was generic in all respects, had cheaper media, which was a huge advantage in the market, and was very successful with it. No one denies or resents it for that. But objectively the best in its generation?

I do not see it. It was a bad gen in a lot of ways overall, and Sony PS1 defines many of the negatives of the generation.

The 360 in the last gen is very similar, you could make a list of 10 major, strong bulletin points of negatives the Xbox 360 had. If the case is that bad against a console, it is tough to say it is objectively the best,  no matter how much an individual may have liked it.

[JustLikeHeaven1]

[QUOTE=Segatarious]

The N64 has serious flaws as well. However, the best of the best on N64 are far superior to the best of the best on PS1.

[/QUOTE]

Eh I'm not so sure about that. Trust me as a Nintendo fan, it pains me to rip apart the N64...but it just wasn't a great machine and Nintendo made some silly choices that ultimately led to it's failure.  

The Playstation may not have been able to compete strictly in a pure polygon vs polygon graphical battle against the N64.  However, it features much better music, was able to use CG FMV (which looking back doesn't really matter...back then it did), and their 3D games weren't always marred by the infamous N64 fog and horrid draw distance.  So even though it was a weaker console, it's game were still graphically and aurally compelling to gamers.

There are many, MANY PS1 games that are dated due to the primitive push into the 3D era.  However, the N64 is just as guilty of this.  So I don't hold graphics to be the end all be all.

As I've stated before, the N64 was the worst of Nintendo's 1st party offerings.  I don't see how people can make an argument that Mario 64 was better than ANY of the 2D Mario games before it.  It's only accomplishment was moving the character into a fully 3D world...and it's just not an impressive or memorable game.  Ocarina of Time came later into the consoles life cycle so it is much better game than Mario 64...it's arguable the best N64 of all time.  However, that one game does not trounce the entirety of the PS1's library.  As a card caring member of the Link fan club, it pained me to say it back then, but Metal Gear Solid, was a better game.  It was more groundbreaking and it holds up just as well today.  I'd still rather play MGS than Ocarina of Time.  

What are the other aces up the N64's sleeve?  Star Fox 64?  Great game, but hardly something that tips that favor towards the N64.  Goldeneye?  Have you played it recently?...it's almost tragic how badly this game has aged.  Play a modern FPS and then go play Goldeneye with 4 player splitscreen...You'll swear something is wrong with the game because it's so choppy.  Donkey Kong 64?  This bloated mess of a platformer proves that bigger and more doesn't always mean better.  Smash Bros?  I'll admit it still holds up today.  However, I would never choose to play the original over the GC or Wii version.  It's fun for a simple diversion, but like Mario Kart, better versions came out later.  Conker?  Still fun today, yes...might even be great.  It's not a well know game that boosts the N64 ahead of the competition.  Are all these games worth owning?  Yeah probably.  However, I don't think any of them make a compelling argument that the N64 was THE gaming machine of the 5th generation.

Plus there are certain categories where the N64 doesn't even compete.  If the two were in a head to head competition it would get an Incomplete for RPGs because it hardly has any.  Both 2D and 3D Fighters are much more common on the PS1.  Survival Horror doesn't really exist outside of Resident Evil 2.  

I still play a heck of alot of old games these days.  Probably more than modern new stuff that comes out.  The PS1 gets lots of playtime because 1) it has an absurdly huge library and as a collector I'm still uncovering new gems and 2) There are TONS of games that have aged remarkable well.  

I can honestly say that I haven't turned on my N64 in well over 3 years.  There just isn't a whole heck of a lot to come back to.  The system never hit it's stride.  Samus never got a game for the system...the long rumored Earthbound 64 never came to be...the ill-fated choice to stick with cartridges made the games expensive...just too many missteps and not enough great games.

Looking back I have a few fond memories of the N64.  Playing Ocarina of Time was one of them.  Experiencing the Rumble-Pak with Star Fox 64 was another.  However, the thing I remember most about the N64 was the waiting.  Always waiting for something new and great to come out.  You know how people complain about lack of games for the Xbox One and PS4?  That's what the entire lifecycle of the N64 felt like.  Month after month of waiting for something new and amazing to come out.  Something that wasn't Buck Bumble or Chameleon Twist...

[pacguy191]

[QUOTE=Segatarious]I do not have any resentment toward PS1.

All the flaws that I have listed are there, and any objecticve perosn who plays the PS1 today will see them.

The N64 has serious flaws as well. However, the best of the best on N64 are far superior to the best of the best on PS1.

Sony to me, has always been generic gaming. Look at the symbols on your controller - circle, square, triangle, etc. That is not resentment.  Sony made a console that was generic in all respects, had cheaper media, which was a huge advantage in the market, and was very successful with it. No one denies or resents it for that. But objectively the best in its generation?[/QUOTE]

Yay for spellchecking I guess.

So according to you, the shapes on the controller + CDs = generic?

What an argument. The N64 wins hands down sir because, er, it doesn't use shapes for buttons. Yes, indeed.

And yeah, it is the best, because of its library. It's not just bigger, with bigger came all sorts of strange and fun games. This isn't a debate about which one you like best, this is a debate about objectively the best of the generation.

[Segatarious1]

Many things about  the PS 1 are generic, the button symbols are just one example.

Skateboard games were big then -I wonder why?? That was their sweet spot to market to. Tons of generic 'Gen X' software, I mean tons. These were not built to last, and have not aged well.

Crash also was literally a generic platforming mascot built to complete with Mario and/or Sonic.


As far a Mario 64 - I disliked it when it first came out.

But when I rediscovered it years later, and learned how to play it in 3D, I marveled at how well built that game is. The move set of Mario alone is amazing - you would think it was a second or third sequel to a game like that, instead of building and delivering that all up front. The camera, for its time, was a revolution, lets not forget that. I love both 3D Mario and 2D Mario. I will not say 3D Mario is better or more fun that 2D Mario, but that's not really the point. I do not want to give either up. Mario World U is an example of a great hybrid 2d/3d Mario, and I do not want to give that style up either. Other than art style, I would rate New Luigi U on Wii U as good a 2D platformer as and Mario NES game. And the 3D games keep getting better all the time, but Mario 64 has not been diminished by that fact, as many PS1 games have been dimished by their successors. Mario 64 is a tight fist of gameplay, it does not age, in my opinion.

 I think it is impossible to over estimate the contributions that both Mario 64 and Zelda Ocarina of Time were to that generation of gaming. Both are A+ games. I  love Mario 64, I do not by remakes very often at all but I would buy a remake of that in a heartbeat.

[HardcoreSadism1]

The Playstation didn't require a one-time hardware expansion pak to support all of its games...

[pacguy191]

[QUOTE=Segatarious]Many things about  the PS 1 are generic, the button symbols are just one example.

Skateboard games were big then -I wonder why?? That was their sweet spot to market to. Tons of generic 'Gen X' software, I mean tons. These were not built to last, and have not aged well.

Crash also was literally a generic platforming mascot built to complete with Mario and/or Sonic. [/QUOTE]
Once again, buttons. Great argument. Congrats.

Tony Hawk STARTED the skateboard game revolution. On the PS1. It wasn't a cash in, it was a completely new idea. Crash? Sure, he's generic. I don't care at this point.

Good job on your debate skills. You've convinced us all. I'll stop responding here, its clear you don't have an actual argument.

[HardcoreSadism1]

I'll humor.

Various aspects of the Nintendo 64's architecture just screams "RUSHED". Whether the software library makes up for it is purely fact or opinion. But what is FACT is how much of a waste of money some of these implementations were. If Nintendo needed to slim down any of their consoles, it was the Nintendo 64.

• You did not have a complete architecture out of the box, you likely spent between fifty to eighty bucks for what is the first "Mandatory Upgrade" outside of CD's or Memory cards. This is worse than a Day One update, Nintendo has the luck of the Irish that generation.
• Expansion slot on the bottom is another big waste of money, why even put it on NTSC Nintendo 64's? The only major use was an obscure, gimmicky Double Disk system which lacked content. That iQ was more worth the money. 
• Power Brick jutting out of the back has this distinctive, ugly lisp, and doesn't look thermally efficient.
• On the subject of temperature, no matter what open-surface shelf I put it on, it gets significantly toastier than other cartridge systems and even the CD-Based Playstation, which first gen models already die after rigorous use.
• The controller is not First-Person-Shooter friendly, as you would naturally exclude the D-Pad, which should never be an inch away from your thumbs.

I don't really want to defend my case but this is what I've noticed about the Nintendo 64, also curse 90's CD systems in general, so expensive for so little lifespan.