Why has there been no crash like in 1983

General and high profile video game topics.
Wallyworld1
Posts: 488
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Wallyworld1 » January 27th, 2015, 11:23 am

Jaguar is getting far to much love in this thread by some. I bought one at launch and did I regret that decision? Your damn right I did!

I did love a few games for it. Wolfenstein 3d and Tempest 2000 come to mind. Most the games I bought for it made me sick to my stomach. Imagine paying $50 for checkered flag and thinking it was going to be even better than Vitua Racer for the Genesis only to see what a train wreck it really was. I was so confused? How could my 16 bit genesis have better racing games than my 64 bit Jaguar?

In hindsight it's easy to see why it sold such few units. I was 16 when this console was released.  I bought it with my own money I earned at my first job. That was a ton of money to me at the time. 
 
I still have a Jaguar with about 30 games. I enjoy it but it's really nothing special in the History of Video games. Just a footnote with an interesting story.

The 3DO had much more impressive games than the Jaguar. PS1 was lightyears ahead of it.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » January 27th, 2015, 4:33 pm

I agree that systems like the 3do and Turbografx had way more good games than the Jaguar. I've always been intrigued by what could have been. If there was a thorough understanding of how the Jag worked in its lifespan things could have been much different. There would have been much more impressive games, and with its clear visuals, it was probably capable of producing some of the best looking 2d games period.

Rev1
Posts: 1777
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Rev1 » January 27th, 2015, 6:26 pm

Honestly, I've been trying to stay out of this because I've been down this route before (literally nothing you say will have any effect on Jon's opinion, which is fine, it's his opinion) but I do have to say as a former Jaguar owner I had all the great games on the Jag (name it, I had it) and I was never really that impressed with it.

I eventually sold the console which pretty much sums up how I felt about the Jaguar. I never sell my consoles, especially since I started collecting games. The Jaguar doesn't have a very impressive library and its best games have been ported pretty darn successfully on other consoles (Saturn and PS1 especially). The only games that weren't really ported that were good were Alien vs. Predator and Zool 2. Tempest is definitely the best on the Jaguar (no argument there) but Rayman was done quite well on the other consoles at the time (I have 3 versions of it- GBA, PS1, and Saturn, not including the Jaguar version I owned). The 3D games on the Jaguar are terrible (Tempest isn't really 3D, excluding AvP) and have aged terribly (plus they weren't that good to begin with). I honestly think the reason the Jag still manages to sell is because of its collectibility factor. It has a small library of games and even less that are good, thus if you want all the Jaguar has to offer you only have to buy 5-10 games at most. That is actually very appealing to certain collectors since it seems very feasible to have a pseudo-complete collection on the

The PS1 has a massive library of games and even if you only took the 2D games on the system, the PS1 would have far more AAA titles than the Jaguar. It's not even a contest. It's like trying to argue with someone who is proclaiming that the sky is purple. When someone says something like that, you want to be like, "no, it's blue, here is XYZ on why the sky is blue." However, you can tell the person the sky is blue all you want but really you're just wasting your time. Throw all the empirical evidence you want into the conversation, nothing will stem from it. You can try and be willing to see the person's side of things but he/she will never listen to you.

Does, the Jaguar have its fans? Obviously. Did it have enough good games to make it worth owning? Perhaps. Was it the best and most underrated console of all time? No. End of story.

HardcoreSadism1
Posts: 526
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby HardcoreSadism1 » January 28th, 2015, 7:04 pm

Without the PS1 the Philips CD-I would have destroyed the market's interest in dedicated CD-Based Video Game consoles.

Then again it's a rare example of a corporate feud influencing all future game console generations.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » January 29th, 2015, 3:23 pm

The PS1 had literally every developer known to man chomping at the bit to develop for them because of all the money put into it and how easy it was to develop for. By 97-98 it had a stranglehold on the industry, which was disgusting and unbelievably unhealthy. You could scour the earth and ask everyone who played it, there will be a general consensus that the graphics were cardboard crap and gave people headaches, and that no one really plays it anymore. What's so great about a system that had so many unhealthy advantages that made it what it is? Compound that with how horribly it's aging. And then to talk about its 2d advantage? Are you serious? For me, knowing what was possible technologically by 97-98 and seeing the horrifyingly primitive graphics, and all sorts of other nagging limitations, makes me sick. And then people are going to defend its 2d library by pointing out all sorts of mediocre titles that are as much a "footnote" to history as the Jag is. I can't think of anything more depressing than "discovering" the PS1's monumentally fabulous 2d library. I can't wait.

ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby ptdebate1 » January 29th, 2015, 4:49 pm

Dude, Jon, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night is in the same league as Mario 3, Super Metroid, and A Link to the Past. In what sense is that "just a footnote"? People want to play it so bad that Sony actually allowed Microsoft to release it on the 360! And what nagging limitations are you referring to exactly? The PS1 had a better CPU, better GPU, better sound, and more reliable construction. And the fact that it was easy to develop for is about the best thing that can be said for a console's hardware.

HardcoreSadism1
Posts: 526
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby HardcoreSadism1 » January 29th, 2015, 5:49 pm

[QUOTE=Jon]I can't think of anything more depressing than "discovering" the PS1's monumentally fabulous 2d library. I can't wait.[/QUOTE]

Then I'm inclined to believe you know squat about the PlayStation.

Please. The forum doesn't need this kind of image. This is a desperate attempt to stick-out and it doesn't work.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » January 31st, 2015, 3:19 pm

A desperate attempt to stick out? I call it an attempt to counter the argument made in this thread that the 3do, Turbographx 16, and Neo Geo didn't put out "anything of note". If there's people arguing that the PS1 and N64 were the 5th generation and that nothing from that time period produced diddly squat, and I vehemently disagree with it, I'm supposed to just remain quiet? If i was desperate to stick out you'd find me in modern gaming threads talking about stuff that I know nothing about. I'm trying to make my argument while people who as far as I know may not even be familiar with any of those systems are constantly belittling anything but the PS1 and N64. So you can just trash those other systems, but when I criticize the PS1 there's this tremendous amount of people calling me a hater? I mean, it seems like there's this general consensus that the PS1 was a great 2d machine. For all I know there's people here that think it's better at 2d than the Neo Geo, they're acting so like those alternative systems didn't exist. You know what, me and my friends have been playing the N64 a lot lately, and it's a blast with multiplayer, and there's a decent amount of good games. But we're not playing the PS1. Because it's aging terribly. I'll explain what I meant by nagging limitations. The PS1 had terrible graphics, they looked like cardboard and were very hard to look at, and it basically took away from the whole experience. The load times were terrible, and set the standard for the industry of every system basically having long load times, quite revolutionary, right? It was the first system I ever owned that didn't even feel like a video game system. For some reason, I don't know if it was the CD option, or all of the other beefs I had, something didn't feel right. It didn't feel pure. It felt like I had to put up with pathetically ugly graphics, the ridiculous load times, and like i was making a concession. I'll play these games and deal with all those limitations, it'll still be fun right? That's what it was.

Sut1
Posts: 789
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Sut1 » February 2nd, 2015, 6:43 pm

I'm not sure how you can hold Zool 2 up. The game is a conversion from an Amiga title, the game suffers from slowdown on the Jaguar, a case could be made that the CD32 version is better.
I don't think you can say the Jaguar is a 2D powerhouse if it struggles to run an Amiga game.

Jon1
Posts: 378
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Why has there been no crash like in 1983

Postby Jon1 » February 3rd, 2015, 12:26 pm

There's better platformers than Zool 2, but as far as technologically, there's no doubt in my mind the SNES or Genesis couldn't handle it. After its lifespan it was discovered, and I'm no computer expert, but it was discovered that the developers didn't know what they were doing, didn't even understand how to use the system properly. For whatever reason, they just didn't know what they were doing, and there was so much more it was capable of. So, we already know the Jag had a few 2d games that couldn't have been duplicated by those other systems, and that's with developers not knowing anything about the system. Again, I point to the Native demo as an example of what was possible. As far as I know even that wasn't using nearly close to the Jag's full power. To this day there's never been a game with a full development team using the new knowledge we now know. It's absolutely astonishing that something like that could happen, that no one had a clue how to properly harness its power. To me, this is a travesty, maybe the biggest in gaming history. There should have been Jaguar games in 93-94 that looked as good as Native, probably even better. That would have totally changed the course of video game history in my opinion. That was the one system that was going to blow people's minds with how good 2d can be, and, remember, this is 93-94. Nintendo and SEGA wouldn't have had free reign on the industry with their obsolete 2d graphics. I'm still very bitter that by 95-96 the "cutting edge" was Donkey Kong 2 or whatever out of date tripe SEGA was putting out. It's pathetic to think that by the mid 90s we were stuck on those graphics. Now don't get me wrong, the SNES and Genesis were good systems, I have no complaints compared to the PS1. If people only knew what was possible 2d wise even by 93-94, it would blow people's minds.


Return to “Video Games General”