CatPix

Basically it says that it would be equipped with a PPC603e, 64 Mo of RAM, would be able to calculate about one million of polygon per second, and calculate light in real time (hey, RTX!). Basically... it's a whole console atop of the Saturn.

For those games, there are FRAM mods for Saturn that replaces the original RAM with FRAM, which is RAM that doesn't lose data when power run out. If I recall right, original Saturn memory cards use a CR2032 battery so if you get an original one, your first reflex should be to replace it, as those batteries are usually rated for 20 years of useful life. Aftermarket ones may either use Flash memory or a CR2032 as well.

I was just going from what the first message said. Unless I understood it wrong? "Theme Park would have to be an underrated favorite of mine" sounds like it wasn't released on consoles.

I'm genuinely surprised to learn that Theme Park games weren't released on console in the US. For many people here it's a staple of sim games on console (I guess, on the other hand most people here never heard of Sim City on SNES so...) Fun Breakout clone with some added stuff like odd bonus, ennemies on screen, "boss" and a goal to pick up letters to win the game : as the goal is to Crack out the password to a mainframe. No idea why this one never made it to the US. I was amazed to see the old 80's Dragon Ball series pop on the internet as memes... Until I learned that the US never got in the Dragon Ball bandwagon in the 80's. And that is probably why that game saw an European release (at least a French one, with in-game translated text). Same reason for this game : (The Zodiac Knights : Saint Seya) On PS1, several survival-horror/horror game were also released in Europe without getting an US release. Given how Silent hill 3 was even released in Europe before JAPAN itself (an the US last) I guess Europe was eager for survival-horrors in the early 2000's. Not the greatest game, but this game is rumored to be the least-selling of the PS1 and as such, the value for it skyrocketed. Sheesh. This one is amusing because it was published in Europe by Konami, in december of '99. That tells you volumes on their lack of faith in their own game, Silent Hill Can't recall much about this game. It exists ? Apparently, Klonoa was selling enoguh for Namco to release that game in Europe, but not the US... A surprising one that I found about only recently : Apparently, there was no US Playstation release of LBA, only computer releases. What's more surprising is that the game was published by EA, and in Europe this was an early release (97) really no reason not to release it in the US... So all those games were released in Japan too. There are some European exclusive that didn't even made it outside. The PS1 was rife with sim games, which always amazed me, but heh. More variety! Constructor exists on other platforms and was even remade recently. But most people I know found about this game from the PS1 version, which was released only in Europe. Of course, there are all the games based on European licences that aren't well know outside. Most of them saw international PC release, but console one were stuck on the Old Continent. Let's be honest, that is one movie I didn't expected to be made into a game... let alone several : I'm not even sure AtariAge is gonna let me display that one... Not sure why it never left Europe XD Of course, unless you have seen the (amazing and moving. Seriously, go watch it.) movie, which was certainly a success in France, having full frontal kid nudity isn't a big selling point for a game for kids. And yes, this is a real product, LICENCED BY NINTENDO and all.

Yep. You donate thingson forums, people say they are interested, they WILL come... and 3 months after when you say you sent everything to the dump, people have the GALL to complain.

I can see that in Europe. In most cases, everything pre-NES but Vectrex and Colecovision was and still is low value. A boxed Intellivision sold for 80€ back in the 2010's, now it's 100€. Boxed games were 4€, now it's 6€. Yes, prices went up, but in the meantime, Zelda on NES went from 40€ to 120€. The main reason is that the demographics that could be the most interested in those machines is not interested in video games in general, or not enough to get through the hassle of buying a CRT TV and set it up for RF consoles. This will most likely affect prices; as gamers get older, they will sell their collection. Now, collectors will probably step in, but will they do if the market goes down? Probably not alot. And gamers in the 2030's or 40's will face the issue of dealing with RF, composite, RGB and YUV to whatever will be the norm. And fighting with increasingly failing electronics that they may not know enough about to fix or will be faced with the issue of chip supplies drying out without proper replacement.

It's difficult to predict. With the Pandemic and lockdowns, people suddenly had more free time and disposable income to spend on video games : so this drove prices up because of the demand. Now that people can get out and do as they did before, demand should diminish.... but there is also less games on the market. So, most likely game prices won't decrease significantly.

HD DVD? I need that for my Xbox 360

I don't see why, because of a judicial imbroglio, Tetris shouldn't be counted. At the core, the issue is that the game was legally and separately sourced from ELORG (Soviet Union) and Novotrade Interactive (Hungary). Given that the game wasn't copyrighted inside the Soviet Union (Copyright existed but Soviet lawyer had only the most vague idea on how it worked) it doesn't make either ports invalid. Beside, the Tetris Company sorted all of this out years ago, even buying back ELORG in the process (and Novotrade Interactive, by then Apaloosa Interactive, closed doors). (this being extremely simplified). The fact that the game original version is the Elektronica 60 and is very rough graphically doesn't really count either, else, I could then call out Space Invader since the original Space Invaders was black and white and used plastic coloured sheets on the screen to add colours to say that all subsequent ports are not real ports? Plus there's the fact, as mentionned by Carlsson, that the most common Tetris design we know was programmed by the original team that worked on tetris for the IBM PC and this version resemble the Tetris we know much more : https://vadim.oversigma.com/Tetris.htm Given that this port was made by the conceptors of the original game, I suppose it make it a very legit port and a good base for later ports. Trying to kick out Tetris because of improper copyright or the original games sounds like a video game version of that US Aeronautic association that tried to claim that Yuri Gagarin didn't really made the first human trip into space because Gagarin jumped out of his ship before it landed...

One simple question : where is Tetris??? Wikipedia list 19 platforms for official ports of Tetris on the main page, and the page for variants lists even more : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tetris_variants Many of those variants include the original mode.

I think your mileage may vary depending on where you lived, if you had pocket money or not, and hell simply if you knew about video games. Back in the early 90's my console was my brother's NES. I think between him and me my original "kid's" stash of NES games, mostly from boying in garage sales, went up to 20 at best. We received no money as kids, but my parents would rather buy us stuff. Not video games, not because they didn't want but because there weren't any in local supermarket until the early 2000's. My SNES games collection grew a bit larger but probably not over 30 games, and again, most of them sourced from garage sales after 1995 as well. It's only when I acquired a Playstation for me around 1999 and a video game store - in fact, a VHS rental service but it was complemented with video game selling (I never heard of video game renting being a thing here... In fact it's pretty much written on games that they can't be rented ) so since PS1 was already a bit old, I got more PS1 games between 1999 and 2001 when I got a PS2 than I got NES and SNES games. But yeah, when asking my friends today, they also remember that having more that 20 games before the PS1 came was quite unusual. And owning more than one system was, too.

I bought my Odyssey 1 about 7 years ago. Complete, with a shipping box from factory. It was 350$. I guess the box would add some value today but I checked recently for my retrogaming club and a complete boxed system, late model (not a 1972 one) still sells on eBay for 350$. You do see some selling for 600 or 700$ but those are 1972 brand new pristine complete - down to the OG batteries - system. So yeah, prices for an Odyssey seems stable for now. I guess the thing is that it's a real collector's item, as the gameplay of an Odyssey is.... very lackluster, to say the least, so most retrogamers would probably be content with not owning one when a 5$ Pong is more advanced.

I grew up with solo playing games or at best (or worst) 1vs1 games. I have no concept of team play and I'm not interested. Mostly because my interest for games can go from "Play daily for hours" then "don't even look at the game icon for the next 6 months" which mean I would be quite the unreliable teammate. It doesn't help that most games today are built around the idea of unspecialized teammates. Not sure about how team racing even works (what do you do? Slow down to buggers the rival team?) but talking with people that play online, most games today have little emphasis on specialized roles. So why would you even learn to play team when you can be a sniper, middle range shooter, brawler and medic altogether? I think that kind of team culture died with online-only co-op games. When you're all in the same room, it's easy to give orders and advices to your teammates and to be a leader, or really, when you play with people you know. When you're just a bunch of randoms, sometime not even talking the same language... How can you define a leader and give roles to everyone? Of course it won't help that many players are usually 12 when they shouldn't be there but heh.

And let's not forget the ZX Spectrum was sold for cheaper than any of those systems in Europe as well. You had what you paid for. And well I guess it's personnal but I prefer a choppy but clean deisign that the flickering mess with equally ear grating noise hellfest that were most Atari 2600 games. And yesI love the 2600, I have the Encore cart and I will fire the 2600 every now and then. But I guess this come come to a preference in what is more pleasing to the eye.

Amusing, to me it's the opposite, most"primitive, flicker-heavy" 2600 games are garbage compared to ZX Spectrum. The 2600 have the edge in the sound department but not by much (and lose completely if we move to ZX Spectrum 128 era) I mean, is really this : worse than the Atari version on every level? (yes it's probably unfair to compare it with Pac Man, but 1) you said "the most primitive, flicker-heavy 2600 game" and I think Pac Man 2600 fits the bill enough ; 2) this is an Atarisoft game. It's Atari's own ZX Spectrum version!

Yes if we want to go in tech wise, it's the same chip than in several other systems or close to be. It's why I said it's close in power to a 3rd gen console and why I would really consider making it part of the 3rd gen instead of the second. The CV is really sitting on the fence. However, as I said, the system has all the 2d gen quirks, and the games that appeared on the system mostly reflect a "2nd gen mindset" than a 3rd gen, which make sense. What we could consider 3rd gen gaming appeared mostly with SMB in 1985 so it couldn't appear on the CV. As I said, if you look at the Famicom and early titles for it you also get 2nd Gen feeling as well. Even the NES redesign, with the VCR look and the ZIF connector, can be tied to the woodgrain and brown styling of the Intelli and the boxy design of the CV in order to looks like a video appliance. (in contrast, the Master System for me looks more like a stereo system part).

I remember reading that there was a Studio I, which wouldn't have been a home console but a "bar/diner" system, which would have bet set on the side of a table or a bar. Basically the equivalent of the mini-arcade cabs filled with gambling game you see today. The project was abandonned for some reason, but the Studio II inherited the form factor and the keypad of the Studio I (I suppose that it was planned to use chicklet keyboards which can be easily sealed to avoid food and drink intrusion and be easily cleaned, unlike joysticks).

The Odyssey isn't analog, it use logic gates, the internal logic is digital in the purest sense, even if it's not "computer" logic per se. But yeah the distinction between generations are a bit fuzzy. Tho I think here everyone will agree that 1st and 2nd gen is pre-83. The 2600 is a good choice indeed, can't go wrong, it's cheap and has tons of games to choose from. I would recommand the Intellivision over the Colecovision, CV are expensive, fragile, and while the games are impressive for the era, they may feel like watered-down arcade ports for someone that don't have experience with earlier consoles. And that's a problem with generations, the CV is closer in power of being an early 3rd gen system (and recent homebrews show it well) than a late 2nd gen system. It's quite the interesting system for this, being made with all the quirks of the 2nd Gen with those controllers, controller tray on the console, expansions modules planned from the get go, but the capabilities of 3rd gen graphic wise. One could argue that the original Famicom also have some of those 2d gen remnants attached to it! The Intellivision is quirky yes, but the sound and feel is quite defining of the second generation IMO, and the fact that Mattel hired young programmers to create original content in addition of porting arcade games also showcase some ideas of "home gaming" of the time, when people weren't forced to think "arcade game". Style that existed also on the 2600 which received RPG and adventure games that you wouldn't have seen on arcade. Of course different opinions for different folks But if anything, being wrong with picking an Intellivision is a cheap mistake, not with the CV, unfortunately.

E5Frog showed it could do things right. I'm not sure the Channel F deserves to be called the worst, as it was the first. Early Atari games were barely better, and it's mostly only a lucky accident that the Atari TIA conception allowed for more graphic freedom than on the Channel F and the Videopac. Also the Channel F worked with half of the Atari RAM as well. In fact, it's quite impressive what they managed to make games for it, period. The worst home console of the second gen has to be the RCA Studio II. Released later than the 2600, yet, games that were barely more impressive that PC -50X pong games, black and white, abysmal control scheme... it takes the cake. Even the 1292 APVS is better, as it had better graphics, real controllers (even if clunky ones ) and way more games.

I just remembered this one, whne seeing the topic pop back up. Clyde's adventures : I haven't though of putting that one before, probably because it's kinda... platformer-puzzle? Real fun but insanely hard and unfair by the end levels, where the precision and memory required get insane, and several levels contain die and retry moment... which isn't so fun when it happen after 20 minutes of precise gameplay. Oh and you can't fool around : Clyde require energy (the grey orbs) when you're out of it, you die.

Some example of VG-5000 games (and probably "good" ones, given how the system is obscure to begin with) There was also the Vtech Laser 500, which unlike the Laser 128, was a clone of nothing but was a bottom of the barrel Z80 computer with BASIC and that's it : "Schools computers" could also fit here, as they made for education and school use but not games. I say "could" because usually those systems were big enough that they received decent games, like the BBC Micro and the Thomson computers. But those are still good examples of how "rough" gaming could get on computers and why I personnally see nothing outstanding in the Aquarius performance (but nothing amazing either, it IS low-perf hardware with low effort games, no problem with that statement)

I wouldn't take "what a system can make compared to competition" a definition of worst system. Or at least not the sole point of comparison. Else, the best handheld of the 90's is the Atari Lynx and the worst is the Game Boy, the worst console of the late 2000's is the Wii, the worst console of the previous gen is the Switch and the best is... you get me I'm sure ? This is why for me the Hyperscan is the worst system, not because it's weaker than the console it competed on, but it was worse than the console it could be compared to : given that the system is mostly 2D but use a powerful 32 bits CPU, it should be compared with the PS1/Saturn/N64 and not the Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii it was a contemporary of. Target and price should be accounted for, else, for most of the 90's the best system would be the Neo Geo then after that, PC would always win. Yes the ZX Spectrum has incredily low specs compared to the Atari 8 bits and C64, but it was sold for 3 time less. This doesn't seems to be a problem when comparing the Switch to the PS5/XboxwhateversillynameMicrosoftnametheirconsolewithnow . This is also why calling the Aquaruis the worst system isn't fair. There were worse systems than the Aquarius on the market back in the day, and some were sold for more. Yes, the Aquarius is still a mediocre machine plagued with mediocre games... but not the worst.

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, those covers are... something But for people that wouldn't know the movie or never seen it, I just wanted to point out that this cover isn't some deranged dream from an alien being but a picture pulled from the movie

Is the ActionMax even a console?

What is "the worst" system? There isn't one universal definition of it. For example here I could argue that while the system was weak for the year of release, it was still more powerful than a ZX Spectrum. So does a system with decent specs is "worse" when it mostly received bad games? Of the 3 main portable consoles released in the early 90's, it's the "worse" one specs-wise that won, and the most advanced that failed the hardest. Since you name the Hyperscan, on paper, the hardware is more powerful than a PS1, except on the 3D spectrum. Everything else is vastly superior. Yet the games are atrocious on all points, including loading. Yes, it's CD tech, but early CD consoles like the 3DO, PS1, and even the CDi and Neo Geo CD had 1X CD players. The Hyperscan uses a 4X CD player, yet, even the CD-i and the Neo Geo CD load games faster than the Hyperscan (for the sake of arguing, except very late Neo Geo CD games but those games provided infinitely better gameplay, visuals and sound :p ). This for me makes the Hyperscan worse. Because as bad as the Aquaruis was, there were similar machines sold BITD on the market that did as poorly both graphics and sound wise. And they were more expensive! The Hyperscan was absolutely behind competition, even the Wii was more powerful. Note that I can accept it, but the Hyperscan games are worse than games that were released 10 years before, even on the worst platforms of the era. Comparatively, most CD-i games are better on all points than Hyperscan games! This is very embarrassing!