Justin222

I was also not impressed by what was on offer. Trevor McFur, for instance, didn't sound like it would be an experience equivalent to a game like Super Metroid.

A minority opinion, certainly. "The Atari 'brand cachet' was more like a hindrance by 1993. They had a bad rep by then. For the general audience, Atari was an outdated brand for cheap old games. For retailers, Atari was known as a bad business partner and a company that had failed to get a really successful product on shelves in over a decade. Even Sam Tramiel admitted that when he said that they made the Atari logo rather small to not immediately have people associate Jaguar with it; the plan was to get the Atari name more into the spotlight with growing Jaguar success, basically having Jaguar help the Atari name get popular again." They had more cachet than the no-name competitors in that list, though. I agree that in comparison with brands like Nintendo, Sega, and Sony they had catching up to do. I think the name of the product and its packaging was good. It didn't have the stiff irrelevant feel of some products. 3DO, for instance, is hardly as catchy as Jaguar. The same goes for 3Di and so on. "The depths that people will go to in order to defend the Jaguar are astounding." Comparing a $250 console to $700 console and expecting one that came out two years before another (the other which sold at a loss) to be equivalent in terms of hardware seem like depths of their own.

I don't see how you'd get that impression from my post. There are aspects of VII that I don't like but it certainly was a better game than VIII, just as VI was a better game than VIII. "3DO, CD-I, Turbo Graphx-16 CD (Turbo DUO for the standalone CD version), Sega CD (Sega CDX or JVC X'Eye for the standalone versions), Neo-Geo CD, and for even a very short stint, the Amiga CD-32." The Neo-Geo CD used a sluggish drive and its controller didn't have a D-pad. Its hardware was also 16-bit era, although very nice for that era. The Sega CD suffered from the slowness of the Genesis hardware, even despite getting a RAM increase and another 68000. It also made the system bulky and add-ons rarely garner the same amount of developer support as base systems. Turbo Graphx was outdated. The Amiga had an awful controller and couldn't be sold in the US. The CD-I's controller was poor and it was priced outside the game console realm. 3DO was priced too high also, although it had the hardware to make an impact. It's true that there were a bunch of oddball systems but Atari still had brand cachet.

Dropped video frames coupled with input lag from a digital TV sounds like a recipe for issues for demanding action games.

1) I mostly agree about the overlays, but other worse controllers had keypads with overlays. To argue that 1993 made keypads and overlays suddenly more of a problem is rather weak. The complaints about the Coleco, Intellivision, and 5200 very rarely involve the use of a keypad and overlays. To me, a lot of this comes down to it not seeming cool. Aesthetic complaints are on the weak side. Also, the keypad really could add value to gaming if developers would really use it to full advantage. I could see a realtime dungeon crawl action RPG game like Dungeons of Daggorath being remade to be more complex (more items/commands that one has to use simultaneously). Not having to spelunk in menus when you're being hit is a good thing. If you're playing a wizard you could have a whole list of spells at your disposal, no menus required. So, even Final Fantasy style games could be better in realtime. The drawback of having to deal with overlays may be smaller than the advantage in these cases. But, it would take developers to develop specifically around the keypad instead of treating it like a gimmick. 2) I agree about the three buttons. That was a design error. The SNES even had more action buttons. However, since SF and MK didn't exist on the Jag, the complaint is weak. The fighting game that did exist was awful. The NES was a tremendous success with two action buttons and it ran complex action games. While three is definitely not optimal for fighting games, this design flaw is not big enough to really help justify a "worst ever" labeling. A console is a lot more than fighting games and people who are passionate about those could get a replacement controller like the Pro Controller or a 3rd-party model. Moreover, the action buttons were large and comfortable. 3) I never had any connector issues with either of the systems I had. Everyone with a 5200 joystick had problems with it being non-centering because they're all like that. The same goes for the small mushy action buttons that are close together on the sides. The Jaguar controller's strengths... did he mention any of those? 1. Comfortable for those with large hands, unlike the NES controller and others. 2. D-pad that was less likely to cause blistering, unlike the PS1 controller. 3. Less cluttered than the current D-pad plus joystick controllers (including PSX dual shock which was out then). 4. Less heavy than the current D-pad plus joystick controllers (including PSX dual shock which was out then). 5. No low-quality miniature joysticks like the current D-pad plus joystick controllers (including PSX dual shock which was out then). 6. D-pad in the comfortable location (unlike XBox 360). 7. Has a D-pad rather than a non-centering joystick. 8. Has a D-pad rather than a disc that makes it difficult to precisely know what direction you're going to move. 9. Has a D-pad rather than a joystick with a lot of throw for greater speed and precision. 10. Has action buttons that are fast (unlike Fairchild, Intellivision, Colecovision, and 5200 — all of which are slower to use). 11. Has action buttons that don't interfere with movement (unlike Fairchild). 12. Has controllers that are not hard-wired (unlike Fairchild and Famicom). 13. Not prone to breakage... not delicate (unlike Fairchild and 5200). 14. Not wireless. 15. No coiled phone cable that pulls the controller away from you (unlike my memory of the Intellivision). 16. Comfortable for use by both left-handed and right-handed players. 17. Overlays plus keypad could be used to create a realtime action RPG like Dungeons of Daggorath where going to menus to use items isn't practical.

So, they're trolling. Apparently trolls have more sway on Wikipedia than facts do. Someone tried to get rid of the nonsense in 2010, if you look at the talk page. But, here we are in 2015 and there are now two photos devoted to ControllerGate, an entire paragraph just for the IGN guy's BS, etc. Someone is clearly doing everything possible to troll via the Wikipedia page. It's amusing but it's also sad. I gave up on contributing to Wikipedia a long time ago because I saw pages devolve after people put a lot of work into them. I saw pages that had sixteen pages of useful information turned into a two page blurb. "I'm not crazy about the Jag controller but the #1 worst controller is harsh." Change harsh to BS. It's simply factually wrong that it's the worst controller ever made. Although it shouldn't be necessary due to common sense (e.g. pick up an Intellivision controller or a 5200 controller and think about using it for Super Mario Bros.), a usability study could easily show that. "if the video said Channel F controllers were the worst nobody would share it, nobody would talk about it, most people would say 'Whats a channel F?' but if they target the Jag you get an instant response, it's just cheap clicks." Someone tried to cite an article that rated the Fairchild the worst ever but Wikipedia's people reverted it, saying it wasn't credible. It wasn't credible because it was a very detailed list that was thoughtfully done but the IGN guy's nonsense is credible apparently. If people want to troll about controllers and generate clicks they can do the old routine of putting a photo of the wrong item for the article. Use the Jaguar controller but then decide, at the end of the article that a different controller is worse. So, even the trolling rationale fails to justify labeling the Jag controller the worst ever.

My young cousin enjoyed playing it when I loaned mine to him. He played AvP a lot in particular. The problem with the nephew was that by the time he got the system he was already using a PS2. He never took the time to appreciate games like Tempest 2000.

The Wikipedia Jaguar controller fetish continues. Now there are two pictures of controllers to obsess about it. Someone needs to really gratify those people and make a "Why the Jaguar's Controller Causes World Hunger, Global Warming, and Kills Kittens" article. Craig Harris from IGN is the guy who is responsible for creating what Wikipedia calls a substantive source for the ridiculous claim that the controller is the worst ever. The Wikipedia article cites "the complexity of the phone keypad" as justification for that claim. We'll just pretend that the Intellivision, Colecovision, and Atari 5200 didn't have a keypad — to accompany far more dire controller design. I suppose it's not complex to try to play games with the non-centering 5200 joystick with its four tiny side buttons and phone keypad — or to try to move in a specific direction with a round disc while using tiny side buttons and a phone keypad. Nah... not complex a bit! Ah, Wikipedia... proving that no amount of intelligence can counteract stupid opinions. (Too bad for Atari that it didn't give IGN some of the ole payola.)

The PS1 debuted near the end of 1995 in the US. The Jaguar was released near the end of 1993 in its test market. If the console had been CD-based and had games that focused on depth its fortunes could have been quite a bit different. When compared with the SNES and Genesis it was a big improvement, at least that's how it struck me when I first played it. When the PlayStation became a serious player, if the Jaguar had been better established, Atari could have released an upgrade that would have corrected the flaws and made some improvements — provided that it retained backward compatibility. As for FMV, couldn't the Jaguar display video via the CD? I don't agree that FF VII's success was mainly due to graphics. FF VIII had far better graphics and made a much smaller impact despite that, because the game was shallower. The original Wii was a smash hit despite using much weaker hardware than the competition. It had a gimmick, the motion controller, which made all the difference. I think the price was lower as well. The Jaguar could have capitalized on its CD-based content (i.e. not having to make concessions to reduce ROM size), making that the gimmick. The only other CD-based system at the time was the 3DO and it was really expensive and didn't have Atari's brand cachet. However, Atari would have probably never had been able to convince Square to put its multi-million dollar Final Fantasy on the Jaguar rather than the PlayStation. It was originally intended to run on a CD-enchanced SNES, though, so anything is possible. It only ended up on the PlayStation because of Nintendo's business decisions. I bet, though, that the cultural barrier would have been too great to surmount.

When I bought it I was disappointed that so much of the screen was covered by a panel.

When I bought a Jaguar I compared it with the SNES and Genesis. I found the upgrade quite significant. Carmack also had a positive opinion of the console as can be seen in an interview that was posted here in another thread. There will always be more advanced consoles. However, the Jaguar suffers from the same problem the Nintendo 64 suffers from: ROM space limitation. Not only are CDs cheap to produce, they offer a lot more space for content. Content is what wins the gaming war, as the NES showed with its deep/complex games. Final Fantasy VII helped sell the PlayStation, not because of its graphical quality, but because of its depth. If it had been released on a cartridge as planned it would have very likely had to receive serious downgrades.

As would I. The 5200 is much worse, even though it's probably the coolest-looking controller ever. The CoCo is the worst controller ever. It has a tiny non-centering joystick, has a tiny overall size that is not easy to hold, and just has one action button that's located in a less than optimal place. They scream "cheap" when you look them and use them, especially since the joysticks are rarely centered (making them look abused and broken), so they even fail at aesthetics. The Fairchild joystick was better-looking and centered (and felt solid and well-built) and the 5200's definitely was better-looking. 1) CoCo 2) 5200 3) Fairchild 4) Intellivision 5) 2600 and Coleco I moved the Fairchild up because its flaws really are greater than the Intellivision's, especially the need to send the entire console in when the thin wires cause the joystick not to be able to move the player up and the lack of a quick action button. I also would rather use a Colecovision controller over a 2600 joystick, although I can see the two being debated because the 2600 joystick was a bit more ergonomic. It only has one action button, though, which is a big limitation — and it isn't that great of a joystick which is why there were so many 3rd-party alternatives. Favorite controllers: SNES, PS1 (not dual shock), Dreamcast, NES, Jaguar Pro I haven't used the Wii controllers except for the gesture model and I haven't used XBox controllers. However, I didn't like the location of the D-pad on one of the XBox controllers at all. It didn't look ergonomic. I am not a fan of the current design of having a D-pad and two tiny joysticks on the same controller.

Cruel to the Jaguar, I assume you mean.

Both the NES controller and the Jaguar controller are pinnacles of design and ergonomics when compared with the Intellivision controller. Can you imagine trying to play a game like Japanese Super Mario Mario 2 with an Intellivision controller? The same goes for the 5200 controller or the Coleco. It would be an exercise in futility. Even games with reasonable difficulty, like Metroid, would be painful.

Cybermorph is fun.

Someone else covered it. The Jaguar was a failure in the market so some editor at an online magazine decided to stupidly dub its controller the worst ever. It was a matter of kicking the dead horse. The Jaguar made for an easy target, especially when it comes to the outrage over the inclusion of a keypad (oh, the humanity). Perhaps the goal was to troll people who knew something about gaming and therefore had experience with much worse controllers. After all, online articles that are clickbait tend to make more money. The Coleco controller was certainly bad, but it was still better than the Intellivision. The Coleco had large side buttons that were easy to press. The Intellivision's side buttons were small and hard. The Coleco joystick was difficult to use but it was still much easier to use than the Intellivision disc. It was also easier to hold than the thinner Intellivision controller. The 5200's three main problems were squishy thin side buttons and, the non-centering joystick, and its fragility. It's too bad the 5200 joystick has so many problems because it definitely looked cool back in the day. If we ignore the CoCo joystick because it wasn't made for a console, I would rank the worst-ever controllers thusly: 1) 5200 — fragile, non-centering, mushy tiny side buttons, overlays are easily lost 2) Intellivision — thin (hard to hold), hard small side buttons, difficult to control disc, overlays are easily lost 3) Fairchild — thin wiring and hard-wired joysticks meant sending in console for repair, very sluggish push/pull/twist button instead of a proper button I haven't used the aforementioned Philips CD-i and Amstrad GX4000 controllers, so I can't gauge how they fit, but I really doubt they're worse than those three. It would be a good thing for someone to do a proper scientific usabiity study to counteract the absurd FUD about the Jaguar controller that Wikipedia refuses to get rid of (three references, including a picture just to bitch about it), even though someone astutely deleted it back in 2010. It's not hard to see the flaws in the Jaguar system, but its controller was a far cry from terrible. Its biggest flaw was that it just had three action buttons.

As far as I know, some not very bright game editor proclaimed the Jag controller the worst ever and lots of copycat bloggers and wannabees have posted me-too pages. It's not even a subjective matter. Objectively, there are far worse controllers. It can be measured scientifically if someone would want to make the effort. I will wager whatever anyone asks that the Intellivision controller, the CoCo joystick, the 5200 controller, or the Fairchild controller will lose against the Jag controller. That is assuming you can keep a 5200 controller working long enough to complete the test (as well as the Fairchild which loved to lose the ability to go forward due to thin wires). I found the controller very comfortable. However, I do think Atari erred by not providing shoulder buttons. The Jag should have shipped with the pro controller and should have skipped the keypad. Who wants to mess with overlays? Now that is a lousy controller. Nice to look at, terrible to use. Not just the disc is awful. The hard tiny little side buttons are also no fun. I think the CoCo joystick earns the title worst controller ever. The Intellivision and 5200 controllers at least looked cool. Plus, they had more buttons. The CoCo joystick has no redeeming features.

I disagree about Cybermorph not being an impressive game. I got a Jaguar when it first came out and I was really impressed by Cybermorph. Raiden is the one that disappointed me (the other game I bought). I felt it was weak that a panel covered so much of the screen. I was also not thrilled by most of the games I saw, like "Trevor McFur". They did not strike me as being particularly high-quality. I was hoping to get the Tiny Toons game that was shown on the back because my best friend loved playing the NES game. That it ended up as vaporware was pretty galling since the $300 price of the Jaguar was a lot for me at the time. Skylar was indeed a bit annoying, but she gave the game personality. I would not want to play the 1 MB version. The animations and the extra voicing are things that add to the game. The Jag should have been a CD-ROM console and should have shipped with the pro controller.

Years back, I got a new boxed Jaguar and almost every game for my nephew, including games like Karts, Iron Soldier 2, and Rayman. After playing Pitfall a little, he put it into a closet and then said he gave it to his dad. He probably sold it or traded it. Lesson learned... give kids the common stuff and keep the rares because they're probably not going to appreciate it.

There are several games I would never choose to do without, whether they're easy to get licensed or not. If posting that constitutes "starting something" with you then so be it.

Most of the games that are hard to get are the ones I think should be included. That includes the Intellivision and Atari as well. My list wasn't designed to be realistic. It's not your list.

Where's Q*Bert and Q*Bert's Qubes? I prefer my list. As for these flashback systems... I would gladly pay more for machines with an SD cart slot or a cartridge slot. I also think the Atari #5 is a mistake because it makes more sense to have a system on a chip than one using emulation. The wireless controllers also don't have a good reputation from what I've read.

Good to know, since serial gamepads don't exist from what I can see anyway.

I forgot to mention Mr. Do.

He did say that people need to configure their monitors and sound cards to get to that level of synchronization, though. He also suggested that his emulator may be unique in offering that level of adaption. There is an accurate-oriented Genesis emulator, though, that is being developed. I wonder if it has the ability to have users synchronize it with their monitors and sound cards. Dropped frames, when they happen infrequently does seem to be less worrisome than input lag.