Lesser Known Consoles - What if You Got One Growing Up

[Tempest]

I never had anything unusual growing up (Atari 400 > Apple IIe > NES/SNES/Genesis > PC). Although a friend of mine had an Astrocade, but it wasn't working so I never got to play it. I remember looking at those weird controllers and wondering how on earth you could play a game with them though.

[Reaperman]

I will say, I was just pleasantly surprised when I poked my head in there and there wasn't a single locked thread on the whole first page. I honestly expected to see at least a couple. Yes, AA has about the calmest jag forum around, but I still half-expected to find somebody mentioning that something about jag might not have been quite the best, and getting several walls of text rammed down their throat for it. I thought I must have made a wrong turn and ended up in bizarro world.

Oh never mind. Today the ol' 64-bit forum looks as expected. That sure didn't take long.

[+pboland]

Personally, I never saw the appeal of the Master System and I don't think I would have liked it all that much had I been aware of it. I mean you have significant issues with the design that would have been a deal breaker for child me. You have the pause button on the console which makes it hard to pause in the middle of the action. You have significant controller issues like the wire connecting from the side of the controller instead of the top. Plus it has a square dpad that makes precision movement tricky. Add in the fact that Sega never had real killer app that would draw in publishers and consumers alike.

 

It's one of the reasons why the Sega's release of the Master System II in the early 1990's fizzled in the US. Even after the Genesis had broken the so-called Nintendo "monopoly."

 

Interesting take. Your statement comes off as a point of fact and that just wasn't the case in 1986. I'm guessing you were not there that Christmas season (or old enough) to remember that there was no presumed standard yet on control pads or pause buttons. Again, most people in the USA didn't even see/hear of an NES until christmas season 1986. That year Nintendo, Atari 7800 and Sega Master System had very similar shelf space at the toy/department stores. The NES was not the dominate force that people seem to remember until around x-mas season '87 to first part of 1988.

 

I was an early adopter and I had no issues at all with the cord coming out of the side of the controller (actually preferred this as it made it easier to hold on to the controller), the square d-pad or the fact the pause was on the console itself. As a matter of fact I found NES pads to be awkward to use because I felt the cross d-pad was too small and the two action buttons always seemed backward to me. It's all in what you are exposed to first and get use to. As for the pause on the console itself, again another non-issue as most kids back then played sitting right in front of the console. If you are use to it, you don't even have to look down to hit it.

 

When I first got my SMS, my friends didn't have any issues using the pause/controllers for it. Heck, my one friend seemed to always beat me at what ever game I put in. That is until he got an NES. Then within about a week or so the SMS controller sucked to him and he could no longer keep up with me. Why? Because he got use to his new NES and how the controllers were made.

 

P.S. I almost forgot that my older bother actually liked the little mini joystick that screwed in to the middle of the SMS d-pad. He would actually do better with the little stick then without.

Edited December 4, 2015 by pboland

[bretthorror]

I am loving this thread because of all the Sega Master System love. If you've read my posts, you know it was the console I wanted at first but got a NES because the SMS was basically obsolete, it was likely the first system I ever played and I loved it. And we talk about killer apps and it's true, the SMS really didn't have one, but I also say that all the cool arcade games of the time were on there and from what I have played, they had the best ports of them to that date in time. Not that I knew this then, but I have a special place in my heart for the system and it makes me a little sad, for some reason, that so many people flock to NES and act like SMS doesn't exist. No, it didn't have a killer app, but put the NES greats out of the way and man for man SMS could go toe to toe. I realize I'm cherry picking here, but my main point is after you have those 100 great NES games, the SMS is a perfect compliment to continue 8-bit collecting and not just weigh yourself down with the garbage titles of the NES library. In 1989, you pick a NES over a SMS, I get that, I agree with that. But in 2015, a wise man will pay the $50 for a SMS and live the best of both worlds, not to mention most SMS overseas games work on our consoles - and that drastically beefs up the library to the point where you can't ignore the system's greatness. Sure, a lot of these games were better on the Genesis, but 8-bit Sonic and Streets of Rage is very novel. A lot of NES games were better in the arcades, but that doesn't destroy the validity of their 8-bit home console port.

 

In a nutshell, what I'm saying is this; let's use Alex Kidd as an example. On Sega Master System, people seem to talk of it as a good platformer that couldn't sell systems. Now lets pretend it wasn't on Sega, but on NES, people would talk about how it's a solid, underrated game that's not as good as Mario but really fleshes out a great NES library. I basically said the same thing about one game in two ways, but one was in a positive way that makes you interested in it, and one talks down on it like it's worthless and makes you uninterested. Whatever floats your boat, but if you think I'm gonna be butthurt over the NES beating SMS 30 years ago, I'm not, and I would in no way be proud of Nintendo beating anyone either since the NES is my favorite system. We're all gamers and we all spend money on this shit, competition is the way we get the best value.

[MrMaddog]

I got a couple what-if's...

 

For one, I really wished I'd gotten a Sega Master System when I was in Jr. High because the downtown drug store was selling "3-D games" for the system. (I'd still keep the NES around for rental games) Problem was they didn't have the console to play them on. And it would have been natural to upgrade to a Genesis to play in my Sr. High & college years since not only were the games so much better than the common 8-bit NES but also had an adapter to play the 3-D games I wished I had. Instead, I did my 16-bit gaming on an Atari ST I got for graduation and was holding out for the Jaguar...

 

Another fork in the road for me was had I not canceled my PS2 preorder and gotten a Dreamcast instead. Instead of playing games on the PC & Xbox systems I would definitely be a Playstation gamer and only use Linux on my PC's for non-gaming uses. In fact, the PS3 would have been a wonderful substitute for a PC running both Fedora and FPS games using mouse & keyboard (before the removal of Other OS).

[empsolo]

Interesting take. Your statement comes off as a point of fact and that just wasn't the case in 1986. I'm guessing you were not there that Christmas season (or old enough) to remember that there was no presumed standard yet on control pads or pause buttons. Again, most people in the USA didn't even see/hear of an NES until christmas season 1986. That year Nintendo, Atari 7800 and Sega Master System had very similar shelf space at the toy/department stores. The NES was not the dominate force that people seem to remember until around x-mas season '87 to first part of 1988.

According to news articles and other sources, the NES sold 1 million units through Christmas of '86 despite not getting a public release until late spring of that same year. Meanwhile the Master System only sold 125,000 units before Sega ended up selling the rights to Tonka toys. To say that the NES didn't get real big until '87, I think is underselling the success of Nintendo that season.

I was an early adopter and I had no issues at all with the cord coming out of the side of the controller (actually preferred this as it made it easier to hold on to the controller), the square d-pad or the fact the pause was on the console itself. As a matter of fact I found NES pads to be awkward to use because I felt the cross d-pad was too small and the two action buttons always seemed backward to me. It's all in what you are exposed to first and get use to. As for the pause on the console itself, again another non-issue as most kids back then played sitting right in front of the console. If you are use to it, you don't even have to look down to hit it.

 

When I first got my SMS, my friends didn't have any issues using the pause/controllers for it. Heck, my one friend seemed to always beat me at what ever game I put in. That is until he got an NES. Then within about a week or so the SMS controller sucked to him and he could no longer keep up with me. Why? Because he got use to his new NES and how the controllers were made.

 

P.S. I almost forgot that my older bother actually liked the little mini joystick that screwed in to the middle of the SMS d-pad. He would actually do better with the little stick then without.

The NES controller was a little on the small side because Japanese developers didn't take into account the fact a lot of a Americans have big hands. It's one of the reasons why my father ended up buying an advantage, so he could play like how he could play his earlier Atari consoles as a young teen. But at any rate, I'm still not convinced that the d-pad on the master system was any good. Considering that, like I said, that a lot of Master System fans feel that the Master System's square d-pad and button layout over complicated controls for what should be intuitively simple controls for games that require tight and precise movement. With the Master System d-pad it feels like I need to be extra careful when making movements, lest I accidentally hit the pad diagonally. This is something I never had as a problem with my NES back in the day.

 

 

That's the reason why I pointed out the first Alex Kidd game. A game that came out about a few years after the release of Super Mario Bros in Japan and hadn't really learned the fact what made Mario great was the relatively easy controls to master early that you need to have perfected for later stages. Something that Sega didn't really learn until they had released Alex Kidd a second time that had corrected the button layout issue on the SMS 2.

 

What I am getting at is that the Master System is playable but it isn't fun to play. I don't like it when I feel I have to fight with the controls and now a controller on a standard first party game. I think it's the design issue that really hurt the Master System as a viable product in the United States and Canada as well as in Japan. I think had the Master System Controllers been better designed, it would had a better perception in the realm of consumer confidence. Both when Sega initially released the thing back in 1986 and as well as a better showing than the dismal showing that the Master System II suffered when it was released in 1990 on the eve of the SNES's North American debut.

Edited December 4, 2015 by empsolo

[CatPix]

That's the reason why I pointed out the first Alex Kidd game. A game that came out about a few years after the release of Super Mario Bros in Japan and hadn't really learned the fact what made Mario great was the relatively easy controls to master early that you need to have perfected for later stages. Something that Sega didn't really learn until they had released Alex Kidd a second that had corrected the button layout issue on the SMS 2.

SMB was released in 1985, Alex Kid in 1986 (in Japan).

While I agree on the flawed square D-pad experience, you can't argue that the Mario scheme is "better". I became the standard, so when you move from the Nes to the SMS, you're confused, but this certainly doesn't make the NES better. Plus, up to 1988 some NES games would reverse the Mario controls as well.

 

Kinda how today, I'm confused because Sony and Nintendo moved the main button from X to O and B to A. It doesn't mean that the old way was better. It's just what I grew up with and what I feel comfortable with.

[empsolo]

SMB was released in 1985, Alex Kid in 1986 (in Japan).

While I agree on the flawed square D-pad experience, you can't argue that the Mario scheme is "better". I became the standard, so when you move from the Nes to the SMS, you're confused, but this certainly doesn't make the NES better. Plus, up to 1988 some NES games would reverse the Mario controls as well.

 

Kinda how today, I'm confused because Sony and Nintendo moved the main button from X to O and B to A. It doesn't mean that the old way was better. It's just what I grew up with and what I feel comfortable with.

I would argue that the Mario controls just work from an intuitive POV. Your brain doesn't have to work as hard going left to fire and a to jump instead having to go back and forth from left d-pad controls to a to fire and back to b to jump. I would argue it's more fluid. Most of the good games used these as standard.(IE Megaman, Castlevania, Kid Icarus, Metroid, etc.) Hell, even Bionic Commando used a variant of these controls for it's control style. And the NES games where they use non-standard controls, especially late into the NES's life, were rightfully derided because of them.

Edited December 4, 2015 by empsolo

[+pboland]

According to news articles and other sources, the NES sold 1 million units through Christmas of '86 despite not getting a public release until late spring of that same year. Meanwhile the Master System only sold 125,000 units before Sega ended up selling the rights to Tonka toys. To say that the NES didn't get real big until '87, I think is underselling the success of Nintendo that season.

 

I don't think I'm underselling the success of Nintendo at that point in time (i.e. 1986) at all. What I stated was true. Store shelves had almost equal representation for NES, Atari, and Sega (I know, because I was there).

 

Yes, Nintendo when compared to single store sale of another console at the time (i.e. head to head) sold better. But, in 1986 the vast majority of video game console players (again as a whole, not one system) was playing something other than Nintendo.

 

Heck, in 1986 alone atari shipped over 800,000 cartridges for the 5200 (yes, I stated 5200, you know the dead, unpopular, failed system). Atari also released the new 2600 (under 50 bucks!) system then too which also sold very well that year. I don't have the sales figures of INTV System III (catalog only console by that time which sold until 1990), but I'm sure they sold some. So, by adding all of that up, I would bet that in 1986 more video game players as a whole were playing something other than Nintendo that year.

 

 

The NES controller was a little on the small side because Japanese developers didn't take into account the fact a lot of a Americans have big hands. It's one of the reasons why my father ended up buying an advantage, so he could play like how he could play his earlier Atari consoles as a young teen.

Well, you just made my point. My point is that it's all about what you are exposed to first (or familiar with). Your father used the advantage because he was familiar with joysticks (by your own statement).

 

But at any rate, I'm still not convinced that the d-pad on the master system was any good. Considering that, like I said, that a lot of Master System fans feel that the Master System's square d-pad and button layout over complicated controls for what should be intuitively simple controls for games that require tight and precise movement. With the Master System d-pad it feels like I need to be extra careful when making movements, lest I accidentally hit the pad diagonally. This is something I never had as a problem with my NES back in the day.

Again, conjecture based on the fact you had an NES long before you ever tried an SMS. You are comfortable with the NES controller because that's what you got use to. It's as simple as that. How do I know this?, because I don't find the SMS controls complicated at all. My point is, be mindful of the difference between stating things as facts when in reality you are stating opinions/preferences.

 

That's the reason why I pointed out the first Alex Kidd game. A game that came out about a few years after the release of Super Mario Bros in Japan and hadn't really learned the fact what made Mario great was the relatively easy controls to master early that you need to have perfected for later stages. Something that Sega didn't really learn until they had released Alex Kidd a second time that had corrected the button layout issue on the SMS 2.

Really!? that's your proof that Alex Kidd controls were "incorrect"?

 

By the time Sega re-released Alex Kidd on SMS2, the NES was the smash hit that you are remembering. Changing the control scheme had nothing to do with it being wrong or incorrect. It was simply a cheap way for Sega (hoping beyond hope) to get NES players to come over to the dark side. It's as simple as that.

 

What I am getting at is that the Master System is playable but it isn't fun to play. I don't like it when I feel I have to fight with the controls and now a controller on a standard first party game. I think it's the design issue that really hurt the Master System as a viable product in the United States and Canada as well as in Japan. I think had the Master System Controllers been better designed, it would had a better perception in the realm of consumer confidence. Both when Sega initially released the thing back in 1986 and as well as a better showing than the dismal showing that the Master System II suffered when it was released in 1990 on the eve of the SNES's North American debut.

 

Again, you are looking at the NES as an established "standard" that should have been emulated because of your preferences. I'm sorry but, the NES was not an established standard in the USA in 1986. If you what to make the case that by 1988 NES was the established standard in USA, then I could agree with you.

 

The Master System II in the USA I always thought was an odd move. It wasn't needed. It really made no sense for Sega to release it (in the USA). Sega released the Genesis in 1989. Again, I was an early adaptor as I got mine x-mas of 1989.

 

Sega releasing the SMS2 had nothing to do with trying to unseat the big N. Tonka's agreement to make the SMS was over and Sega saw that the SMS was still making some money. The SMS2 was cheaper to make than the SMS1 and they figured, might as well squeeze what we can out of it. It's dismal showing had nothing to do with its design. It was too little too late and it confused consumers because why buy a Sega Master System when I can get this really cool looking Sega Genesis which was already on it way to being Sega next established console before the SMS2 even came out. (Just for clarification, this last statement pertains only to the USA game market at that time and not the areas of the world where the SMS was actually more popular, i.e. Europe & Brazil)

Edited December 4, 2015 by pboland

[CatPix]

The SMS II exist because Sega redesigned the system to look less 80's, and cust costs, because the SMS was selling strong in Europe and Brazil. By this regard it was worth designing a new system to squeeze out some money (the SMS was sold in Europe until 1996, and in Brazil up to 1997 - tho I beleive that Brazilian SMs at this point where made by Tec Toy and not by Sega those aside from roaylties, those might not count).

So the SMS II release happened for the sole reason that they had no more SMS I model stocks.

 

BTW, even as cost reduced system, the French SMS II have RGB out, not RF - a proof that they cared enough about the SMS to adapt it to one specific market.

[+pboland]

The SMS II exist because Sega redesigned the system to look less 80's, and cust costs, because the SMS was selling strong in Europe and Brazil. By this regard it was worth designing a new system to squeeze out some money (the SMS was sold in Europe until 1996, and in Brazil up to 1997 - tho I beleive that Brazilian SMs at this point where made by Tec Toy and not by Sega those aside from roaylties, those might not count).

So the SMS II release happened for the sole reason that they had no more SMS I model stocks.

 

BTW, even as cost reduced system, the French SMS II have RGB out, not RF - a proof that they cared enough about the SMS to adapt it to one specific market.

I agree and I also knew of it success in other countries outside the USA. That's why I made sure to state that SMS II made no sense in the USA (and only in the USA). It made perfect sense everywhere else.

[CatPix]

It's just a global economy scale really. If you open an US SMS, there is a PAL circuitry inside - SMS I and II can be rewired almost on the go to go from PAL to NTSC mode (more from 60htz to 50 htz, you need to replace the video encoder to produce PAL or NTSC composite video and RF of course).

 

 

 

(no, this puny wire isn't a poor switch job - it's the original Sega wiring)

 

They could have ditched the SMS and just sell the Base converter, but I guess thye hoped to gain some sales in the 8 bit range, as the Base converter would have been beneficial only to Genesis owners.

 

it's not as if they had production lines for the PAL and US NTSC models. When they stopped making the SMS I for Europe, they had no choice but to move to the SMS II for the US.

 

Unlike Nintendo, that made NES PAL board specific enough - the Top Loader NES was never made into a PAL version from what I know, despite the NES being sold up to 1995 here as well.

Edited December 4, 2015 by CatPix

[empsolo]

I don't think I'm underselling the success of Nintendo at that point in time (i.e. 1986) at all. What I stated was true. Store shelves had almost equal representation for NES, Atari, and Sega (I know, because I was there).

That may be true but that really has no bearing on the discussion.

 

Yes, Nintendo when compared to single store sale of another console at the time (i.e. head to head) sold better.

Not just better but out sold the competition 3-1 and that was with the black box titles alone.

 

 

But, in 1986 the vast majority of video game console players (again as a whole, not one system) was playing something other than Nintendo.

It's hard to dispute this because we don't know the statistics on who was playing what. All we can gleam from the pages of history is to look at sales figures for Christmas of 1986. Of which the NES sold roughly 1 million units. And we can safely assume that a at least a million or two NES cartridges were sold that same christmas.

 

Heck, in 1986 alone atari shipped over 800,000 cartridges for the 5200 (yes, I stated 5200, you know the dead, unpopular, failed system).

I've heard of claims of 100,000 to a million VCS titles sold in 1986. Mostly to clear old stock and some of that includes international sales in regions that had neither Sega or Nintendo's presence yet. For the record, I have never seen any sort of stats to back up the assertion that 800,000 5200 carts were sold that same year. I would love to see some sort of stats on that matter.

 

Atari also released the new 2600 (under 50 bucks!) system then too which also sold very well that year.

Which brings me back to my previous point.

 

I don't have the sales figures of INTV System III (catalog only console by that time which sold until 1990),

I am aware the INTV III was being sold. IIRC, INTV Corp ended up pushing the INTV III as they did when they saw the early success of the NES's LA test launch and saw that there was a market for consoles again.

 

but I'm sure they sold some. So, by adding all of that up, I would bet that in 1986 more video game players as a whole were playing something other than Nintendo that year.

If we we are going to include the older generation that had not yet switched to a newer system, I can see the argument but in terms of newer gamers going forward, I highly doubt this was the case.

 

Well, you just made my point. My point is that it's all about what you are exposed to first (or familiar with). Your father used the advantage because he was familiar with joysticks (by your own statement).

Yet the controls for the advantage were the same as the arcade games that had been pumped out. Action button on the right, fire button on the left.

 

 

 

Again, conjecture based on the fact you had an NES long before you ever tried an SMS. You are comfortable with the NES controller because that's what you got use to. It's as simple as that. How do I know this?, because I don't find the SMS controls complicated at all. My point is, be mindful of the difference between stating things as facts when in reality you are stating opinions/preferences.

Even so, my conjecture isn't without merit considering that the Japanese had responded more favorably to the Famicom's control layouts and later the PC-Engine layouts versus the Sega Mark III's. I would argue that based upon how well the controls were received in one region, should given Sega the impetus to change their control scheme to suit the new style of gameplay that arrived with the gamepad.

 

 

Really!? that's your proof that Alex Kidd controls were "incorrect"?

 

By the time Sega re-released Alex Kidd on SMS2, the NES was the smash hit that you are remembering. Changing the control scheme had nothing to do with it being wrong or incorrect. It was simply a cheap way for Sega (hoping beyond hope) to get NES players to come over to the dark side. It's as simple as that.

They aren't "incorrect", they are just clumsy. Sega had a year to digest what made Super Mario Bros a big hit in Japan on the Famicom. And instead of delivering a product that should really show case what the Mark III could do, what they instead gave both Japanese and American gamers was a nicely looking but ultimately a mess of a game.

 

Again, you are looking at the NES as an established "standard" that should have been emulated because of your preferences.

It's not just my preference. Take a look at how the Famicom revolutionized gaming in Japan with how it changed the way players played games up until that point. A big part of the Famicom's success is in how it gave players a greater sense of control of their characters than before. Sega, instead of building on the Famicom's success, gave us a a control scheme that was altogether clumsy.

 

 

I'm sorry but, the NES was not an established standard in the USA in 1986.

Yet it was a established standard in Japan. Nintendo gambled and won on the idea that it's controller inputs would universally lauded.

Edited December 4, 2015 by empsolo

[CatPix]

The Famicom wasn't a major success in Japan until the Super Mario Bros release. It's why Nintendo put out a load of add-on for it, including the Famicom Disk System - the idea behind it was to offer games with a save feature; and save feature are useful only on large games with lots of things to do, or lots of texts - like Zelda, or Metroid - and they knew that at this time, even Japanese customers wouldn't pay twice the regular price of a Famicom cart to get more ROM space and a battery-backed SRAM.

The FDS was almsot from the start a short-lived add-on, but Nintendo made it anyway.

 

And no, your personnal feeling of the Mario scheme being good and Alex Kidd being clumsy is based on nothing.

Proof is, Nintendo reversed the B and A (it feels like on Ocarina of Time 3DS and Majora's mask).

Do you think it mean that Nintendo was all wrong all this time, or that in 1995, Sony made the PS1, which (in Japan) used O as the main butto, and X as back/undo option, and that change spread to US and Euro games in the late PS2 life and PS3, making Nintendo the odd control scheme style, and they changed to appeal to new gamers used to the other type of controls?

[empsolo]

For example, Mario punches upwards when he jumps, so Alex will punch sideways. Stuff like that. (laughs) Also, we also reversed the jump and attack buttons from Mario. At the time we thought we were doing something “different”… but we were mistaken. Now when I look back on it, it’s just nonsense. And it’s harder to play that way. (laughs)The Famicom wasn't a major success in Japan until the Super Mario Bros release.

False. According to Stephen Kent, The Famicom would become the best selling game console in Japan by end of fiscal year 1984.

 

It's why Nintendo put out a load of add-on for it,

Nintendo put out add-ons most because Yamauchi initially had the vision of it being a consolized personal computer. Most of that was dropped when people expressed more interest in just the console part. Though for some reason, Nintendo kept releasing updated carts for Family Basic....

 

 

including the Famicom Disk System

Which had nothing to do with the Famicom's popularity or lackthereof. Rather the FDS was launched because the cost for cartridge chip sets had become very high in late in 1985. It was cheaper to move to a floppy disk format. Ironically, Nintendo moved back to carts in 1988 when the cost in chips came down lower than the floppy disks that Nintendo was making.

 

 

- the idea behind it was to offer games with a save feature; and save feature are useful only on large games with lots of things to do, or lots of texts - like Zelda, or Metroid - and they knew that at this time, even Japanese customers wouldn't pay twice the regular price of a Famicom cart to get more ROM space and a battery-backed SRAM.

The FDS was almsot from the start a short-lived add-on, but Nintendo made it anyway.

This is true.

 

And no, your personnal feeling of the Mario scheme being good and Alex Kidd being clumsy is based on nothing.

False. Even the original developer admits that they kind of screwed up on the controls of the game.

 

Ossale: Well, it started about one year after Sega had split its development sections into two, arcade and console. Super Mario Bros. was already a big hit by then, and the Famicom was building a rock-solid foundation as a game console. Sega had just put out the new Sega Mark III, and they tasked us in the Second Development unit to create something that would sell as well as Mario. And so we set out to develop a new action game.

 

For example, Mario punches upwards when he jumps, so Alex will punch sideways. Stuff like that. (laughs) Also, we also reversed the jump and attack buttons from Mario. At the time we thought we were doing something “different”… but we were mistaken. Now when I look back on it, it’s just nonsense. And it’s harder to play that way. (laughs) [/quote]

 

Proof is, Nintendo reversed the B and A (it feels like on Ocarina of Time 3DS and Majora's mask).

Huh? A is used for dialogue and rolling while B is the fire button on the 3DS. Same with the original and all subsequent re-leases....

 

 

Do you think it mean that Nintendo was all wrong all this time, or that in 1995, Sony made the PS1, which (in Japan) used O as the main butto, and X as back/undo option, and that change spread to US and Euro games in the late PS2 life and PS3, making Nintendo the odd control scheme style, and they changed to appeal to new gamers used to the other type of controls?

I never liked the PS1 controls. The Xbox controls are much better, IMHO.

Edited December 4, 2015 by empsolo

[CatPix]

Hah, I checked and yeah,t he buttons are the same. What confused me is that B is now at the bottom of the diamond shaped buttons grid, and isn't the lefmost button like on the N64. The "correct" way on the 3DS should be Y and B to feel liek the N64, and not B and A.

[+adamchevy]

I would have loved to have a vectrex when I was growing up. If I would have had one growing up I would have under valued its awesomness I think.

[empsolo]

Hah, I checked and yeah,t he buttons are the same. What confused me is that B is now at the bottom of the diamond shaped buttons grid, and isn't the lefmost button like on the N64. The "correct" way on the 3DS should be Y and B to feel liek the N64, and not B and A.

Personally, I prefer the SNES style pad. It's why I wasn't a huge fan of the N64.

[fiddlepaddle]

I think this discussion of different control layouts is interesting. I know I have my own preferences, which ARE based on what I learned first.

 

It's analagous to my experience of switching between different computer keyboards. I originally learned to type on (gasp!) a manual typewriter, then moved to electric typewriter, then teletype, then keypunch, then various personal computers, beginning with the chicklet-style keypad of the Commodore Pet on up to today where we can all go out and get pretty much our favorite layout and custom keys.

 

What I've learned is that switching to a new configuration is uncomfortable at first, but continued use reduces, and eventually eliminates that issue as I adjust. Of course, some configurations are enherently more efficient, but most people are pretty good at learning...that's our competitive advantage as a species, after all.

 

Although I prefer a joystick, I still thoroughly enjoy fun games for most any system with the standard controller.

 

And, there are lots of fun SMS games, with their own unique charm that is never duplicated on the NES (and vice versa). I prefer BOTH, and it seems silly to argue over which is better or bigger when we all have access to so much more than we did in when these companies were battling for Christmas market share.

[bretthorror]

And, there are lots of fun SMS games, with their own unique charm that is never duplicated on the NES (and vice versa). I prefer BOTH, and it seems silly to argue over which is better or bigger when we all have access to so much more than we did in when these companies were battling for Christmas market share.

 

I know, it's so weird that people choose a side 30 years later when everything is cheap as hell to own. And it's usually Nintendo fans dismissing everything else, which is strange because today the Wii U is likely to barely outsell the Master System worldwide in an age when there are so many more gamers than back in the day. So it's like you have a person acting tough because Nintendo ruled for a decade 20 years ago. I couldn't have been happier for Nintendo's success with the Wii and I love my Wii U, but the irony of listening to people talk about Nintendo like they're kings of the mountain in video games when their console is going to be the worst selling of any major console post-crash in history is alarming. The NES was really their only era where you had to have a Nintendo product or you'd be on the backburner. The Genesis was on par with the SNES for most people, The PS1/2 destroyed them, I love the Wii, but never could I say I would rather have it than my 360. I guess my issue is it's odd that a group of people could be so arrogant in supporting the NES/SNES when Nintendo has rode the backseat since then. It's hard for me to comprehend people in the Youtube comments making snide remarks to, say, the Saturn when the Wii U is going to barely outsell it, so the pot is calling the kettle black. It's like you have to read their comments like you're in 1994.

[empsolo]

I think people make snide remarks about the Saturn is due to the fact that Sega's advertising was all about pigeonholing the SNES and NES as the "kiddy consoles" during Genesis days and talked endlessly about blast processing. (And yet their console couldn't make the jump to 3d for whatever reason) I really hated Sega for their negative advertising and I swore up and down that the only Sega products I would ever buy would be if they appeared on a Nintendo console. And low and behold, I ended up buying Super Monkey Ball and Sonic Adventure 2 for the GCN day 1.

 

 

 

As bad as the Wii-u has done, I'll take the silver linings of 1) at least it's number 2 in Japan, 2) is going to outsell the Saturn and Dreamcast in terms of historical numbers, and 3) Nintendo is still the kings of bringing quality console style games to the portable systems.

Edited December 5, 2015 by empsolo

[bretthorror]

I think people make snide remarks about the Saturn is due to the fact that Sega's advertising was all about pigeonholing the SNES and NES as the "kiddy consoles" during Genesis days and talked endlessly about blast processing. (And yet their console couldn't make the jump to 3d for whatever reason) I really hated Sega for their negative advertising and I swore up and down that the only Sega products I would ever buy would be if they appeared on a Nintendo console. And low and behold, I ended up buying Super Monkey Ball and Sonic Adventure 2 for the GCN day 1.

 

 

 

As bad as the Wii-u has done, I'll take the silver linings of 1) at least it's number 2 in Japan, 2) is going to outsell the Saturn and Dreamcast in terms of historical numbers, and 3) Nintendo is still the kings of bringing quality console style games to the portable systems.

 

I'm not defending the Saturn necessarily, I'm just comparing sales. I have a Saturn and I liked it ok, I guess, but as described in my OP I haven't quite gotten into that system. I probably should buy 10 more games for it. I think I only have 10. I just also think comparing Wii U's modest sales improvement over Sega consoles to be a bit of a loaded gun because if Sega wasn't mismanaged and hadn't released a new console every damn year, these systems would have sold and would have had good games. But if my aunt had a cock, she'd be my uncle, so I get that too. I do want to say that the Wii U reminds me of the Dreamcast in a lot of ways. It has a great, small library for a system that didn't sell well. Nintendo is a favorite of mine, but at the same time they irritate the everloving shit out of me. I love the Wii because they actually did what Nintendo should do. The Wii gave us 3 legit Mario games, 2 Zeldas, 2 Metroids, Punch-Out, Paper Mario, and the list goes on. The Wii U has given 2 and Mario Maker is cool, but Jesus, release more. Release a couple Zelda games per generation. No Zelda or Metroid 3 years into the Wii U is a disgrace. I hate to say it, but it is. I'm buying a Nintendo console to play their IPs and they can't even give us that. With the Wii, they actually did, so that's why I hold the console in such high regard. Put your great IPs out there when you have little third party support, for crying out loud.

 

The thing about the "kiddy console" business is it really has held Nintendo back through these years. There's an element of truth to it, because I want my blood in Mortal Kombat, so Nintendo censoring that is bullshit. It just proves my earlier point that Nintendo can never be a standalone console. I love Nintendo IPs, but it's not a complete experience. So we have to buy a Wii U and a PS4 to get what we really want when Nintendo has the power to make me not even need a PS4. I ain't shitting on the Wii U, I like mine, but Jesus. Make a new 8-bit Zelda game in addition to whatever you have planned for modern releases. They have the power to do so much more with what they have than they do. They have such infinite possibilities and they only scratch the surface, which is what frustrates me the most. Make a sequel to the Mario 2 style of Mario game, make another 8-bit Punch-Out, do whatever. If they did this, the Wii U would be in the headlines every week and all they'd have to do is supply us with the real games we want instead of making us turn to stuff like Shovel Knight and Axiom Verge. I think they should supplement their titles with new retro titles because that's what the people buying their system want. Nintendo has the real games we are playing others to emulate, and they sit on them, and that makes no sense to me. If they had third party support, fine, but it's a little insulting to buy a Nintendo console for their IPs and then not get them.

[empsolo]

Yeah, it can be pretty rough being a Wii-U owner. I understand that we haven't had a good solid Metroid game since Prime 3 for the Wii, And it sucks. But on the other Metroid has been known to skip console generations in the past. It skipped the N64 due to the fact that the N64 didn't have the hardware that could do a Metroid game justice. I can understand why we don't have a Mertroid game for the Wii-U. It's why I'm hoping that Metroid is an NX launch title, because Nintendo does need something of that calibre for this new system.

 

Though, I suspect the reason why the Wii-U didn't get many Nintendo releases was because Nintendo spent a better part of two years propping up the 3DS against the Vita and spent a good number resources to making games to keep that system alive. I guess they thought that 3rd parties like EA would pick up the slack while Nintendo rescued the 3DS. And then Nintendo got left at the altar and has been struggling to support two systems nearly by themselves ever since, which sucks. But hey, at least we got a few great Mario games, an excellent Mario kart game, a new Donkey Kong Country game, highly regarded continuation of a IP (Splatoon), as well as a brand new IP in Splatoon. But yeah we need something more. Hopefully the NX is a step in the right direction.

 

As for Nintendo's kiddy image or branding? Let's not forget that a lot of Nintendo's practices were instituted to mollify powerful congresscritters who pretty much were beholden to rightwing christian constituents. Nintendo had to be strict in certain areas, lest the federal government breath down Nintendo's neck more than they already did. But as soon as the ESRB was instituted, Nintendo ended trying to turn it's image from a family friendly one to n "games for all gamers" sort of image. Though Nintendo was never able to shake the earlier image. I still blame Sega to this day for poisoning the well.

Edited December 5, 2015 by empsolo

[The Usotsuki]

Keep in mind that after a lot of people jumped ship to Sega over MK1, Nintendo let MK2 through uncensored with just a disclaimer - and it was arguably the best port of the game (mainly because Probe sucked and Sculptured was good at their *cough* game).

[bretthorror]

But the N64 could have given us a great Metroid game, We don't need to get into CD vs. cart, but Symphony of the Night is arguably the most beloved Castlevania game ever, and it was 2D gameplay on a 3D oriented console. Nintendo has the benefit of not having to follow the regular conventions because people would love to pay $30 for a new 8-bit Mario game, if not more. Metroid 64 would have been the 4th Metroid 2D exploration game in like 14 years, it's not like people could grow tired of a quality game at that rate.

 

Nintendo has always dominated the handheld market, and while it needed quality games on the 3DS, that's a different story altogether, and games can coexist with one another. We all have a soft spot in our hearts for Nintendo and that's fine, but if any other console pulled the shit they have with first party titles not getting adequate games, there'd be an outrage. That's part of what I was saying earlier about Nintendo fanboys, they criticize the shit out of everything but they don't hold their own favorite company accountable for the same shit, which makes those people totally useless in terms of their opinons. Like it or not, there is no excuse for fanboyism in credible video game history. History books aren't written by fanboys, they're written by people who gather facts. So all the Youtubers out there who act like they have some sort of journalistic integrity would and should be laughed at.

 

The yin to the yang is Sega was the badasses and Nintendo played it safe, that's why the Genesis sold so many consoles. It would make no sense for Sega to just copy Nintendo's every move, that's why they did what they did. People take it to heart when it really was the only option. A smart business creates an alternative. The Sega Master System really didn't create an alternative and it failed because you can't duplicate the home runs the NES had and it tried to just be NES lite. With the Genesis, it was different, and that's why it was successful. In the industry, the Xbox and Gamecube faltered while the PS2 became perhaps the greatest console in history, pound for pound. The 360 got a year jumpstart and PS3 was a $700 system here in Canada, unreasonable, and it took Sony a long time to catch up. With the success of the 360 on their side, Microsoft tried to shoe-in digital games, mandatory Kinect and no used game sales to which Sony realized they needed to be the alternative that took away those restrictions and be in the favor of the people, and now PS4 is kicking everyone's ass. It's all about being with the times, that's it, that's all. And then we have Nintendo who can't give me a Metroid or Zelda game three years after I bought a Wii U on launch day when the only reason to buy their console is for the IPs. It's really impossible to defend that chicanery. If it was anyone but Nintendo, we would never excuse the $300 we spent on the Wii U in hopes the NX is better, we'd feel shafted and not want to deal with that company again. Sega is shit on to this day for not fully supporting its consoles, yet Nintendo has done the same with the Wii U and people want to sweep it under the rug. That's not fair. And the most insulting thing is Atari was grasping at straws and struggling and failed, Sega did too much too fast and failed, but Nintendo has all the money in the world and they still choose not to deliver what fans paid for. Nintendo is the reason 8-bit games are so beloved, and in the height of the resurgence in popularity, they haven't made official retro sequels or anything of the ilk. It's all a missed opportunity. If the PS4 passed on that niche, it'd be understandable with their goal of forcefeeding mainstream ideas down a willing consumer gullet, but Nintendo's home console is fledgling, it needs all the help it can get, and that help is there, but not used. And if Nintendo isn't a kiddy console (Lord knows I hate that term, but hear me out), why in the blue hell do they not put some of their enormous riches into making exclusive M-rated games? They're complacent.