What's the Worst Console You Ever Played?

[CaptainCanadian]

Oops it is AMAGON, I hate that game with a passion. I was pretty sure it was called AMOG but that might be because I'm from the Universe that had the Berenstein Bears.

Edited August 19, 2020 by CaptainCanadian

[IntelliMission]

@CaptainCanadian By the way and sorry for the offtopic: what's the worst console you ever played?

[carlsson]

Ok, so by 1989 Nintendo still hadn't got their sh*t together when it came to quality control on what they released. I know the NES lived on a few years in the 1990's which would mean for 2/3 of its commercial life, Nintendo published just about anything they had access to and not until they also had the SNES to cater to, they put more effort into the later NES games... or?

[ClassicGMR]

This monstrosity suuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks

 

[Tanooki]

8 hours ago, carlsson said:

Ok, so by 1989 Nintendo still hadn't got their sh*t together when it came to quality control on what they released. I know the NES lived on a few years in the 1990's which would mean for 2/3 of its commercial life, Nintendo published just about anything they had access to and not until they also had the SNES to cater to, they put more effort into the later NES games... or?

No they did, just their seal of quality was more of a front.  They let people release whatever pretty much as long as it wasn't broken so you could get the greats from existing still third parties, or the crap like from LJN and a few others people openly mock.  As long as your game wasn't broken and you paid the licensee fee it was fine for you to release 6 games a year, and for those who got crafty and opened a front, such as ULTRA for Konami you could do 12 a year.   And yeah the NES lived with a steady though shrinking run of games in 1991-1993 a good  year and a half into the SNES on the shelf, and the final game Wario Woods was in 1994.

[tripletopper]

Worst console ever?

 

The US version of the Emerson Arcadia 2001.

 

It's about Atari's and Coleco's common  girlfriend, Sue.

 

They would sue Emerson if they released the games they had rights to in other markets.

 

Elsewhere the Emerson was good, I heard.  But in the US its games were scrambled messed of errors and unfun gameplay.

 

In America, was there one redeeming game?  Jungler perhaps?

 

Also weren't they forced to invent region locking so you can't import a foreign Berserk or Phoenix to the US?

Edited August 20, 2020 by tripletopper
Mistyped title ... Stupid auto correct.

[CaptainCanadian]

3DO is the worst I believe. Terrible selection of games and the selling point was that 'its not just a game system its a multimedia something or other'. 

[Bill Loguidice]

28 minutes ago, CaptainCanadian said:

3DO is the worst I believe. Terrible selection of games and the selling point was that 'its not just a game system its a multimedia something or other'. 

I strongly disagree. It had some really great games on it and a library of 300+ titles. I'd say it was easily the best of that generation of consoles, which included the CD-i and Jaguar, which, although not saying much, is still something to consider when saying something was the "worst". There are easily far worse consoles both before and after it.

[CaptainCanadian]

Touche. Perhaps the worst console ever made is the Ouya?

[Lost Dragon]

2 hours ago, CaptainCanadian said:

3DO is the worst I believe. Terrible selection of games and the selling point was that 'its not just a game system its a multimedia something or other'. 

Multimedia was very much the buzzword back then. 

 

CDi 3DO, Jaguar CD, CD32 etc. 

 

 

Someone from Sony described them as the Swiss Army Knives of hardware, you had a knife, fork etc, but you wouldn't want to eat your dinner with them. 

 

Playstation was a pure games machine. 

 

Ironically they pushed later generations of Playstation as your one stop entertainment device. 

 

Wasn't it the Playstation 3 which Sony marketed as it only does everything, at one point?. 

[Bill Loguidice]

4 hours ago, CaptainCanadian said:

Touche. Perhaps the worst console ever made is the Ouya?

The Ouya kind of did what it was supposed to in my opinion, so I wouldn't necessarily call it the worst. I think there's one candidate console that's hard to beat, although I like to cut it some slack because it was only the second programmable console released, and that's the RCA Studio II. It had no separate controls, it only output black and white, etc. It seemed silly to release such a console AFTER the Fairchild VES, even though it was supposed to be released before it. 

 

Of course, there were a lot of pseudo-consoles, hybrid consoles, and region-specific systems that were also pretty bad, and they had the benefit of hindsight that RCA really didn't. I know when I had a Memorex VIS in my collection, for instance, I couldn't get over how painfully slow it was to operate. So certainly that one would rank in my personal listing.

 

I wonder if a better exercise would be to pick the worst console by generation and then have something of a top 10 list? Of course, that would be hijacking the OP's thread, and that's not cool.

[Torr]

Dude ain't looking for a definitive answer of what the "worst console ever" was....

They asked, "Whats the worst you've played?"

Big difference.

They want opinions. Problem is opinions piss people off, because they think everyone else is supposed to have the same opinion they do, and when they realize they don't, well then, it's time to start converting people by explaining to them why their opinion is wrong.

 

If someone thinks that the N64 is worst console they ever played.... then it is.   To THAT person.

 

[CaptainCanadian]

 Ok, after a long day of preparing for a job interview with a certain game company, I can tell you that the absolute worst console to ever exist is the Android phone. The games are a steaming pile of …. I wish I could tell you exactly which games I had to prep to play but [#1. I wont get the job] and #2. NOT ONE was worth more than a minute of my time. These are multi-million dollar titles and yet they pale in comparison to the absolute diamonds that came out of the C64/Console era.  I have no idea how this company is one of the top 3 in the world. Did IQ's drop sharply while I was away?

 

I also have no idea how millions of people can find any relaxation playing these dumpster fire titles. They are basically kiddy casinos. I've played almost every game on every system save for the 3D0, Saturn and the systems prior to 1980 and I can definitively say that the new games coming out lack any sort of imagination or originality. Not only that but IMO touch screen controls suck. I have shakey hands and maybe that interferes with my ability to play a bit but the games, they suck, they suck the big one. Game after game after game was a rip off, an excrement soufflé of rehashed clones of the last 5 years. I swear this company... its like they rob a bank and make off with a bag full of turds. Not one game in something like 30 has been any good but apparently the younger generation is in love with the stuff. 

 

I really can't even articulate this properly but I'm sure others here will share in my sentiment. Controls are a big deal, touch screen controls lack well... control. 

For me anyway, they seem to just clutter the screen with complex UI boxes and circles. I never liked the LCARS system for this reason. Give me switches, buttons and joysticks anyday. I don't think there's any kind of skill just tapping away at a touch screen. I used to watch the older kids play Mortal Kombat and sit in awe of how amazing their skills were. Street Fighter is another one where you had to develop some skill to play. Touch screen tapping... ugh.... there just isn't any skill involved. Not to mention most of these games run off a pay to win system. Arcade games made you develop your skills, the better you got, the less you paid. These games, the more you play, the more you spend. I know its a legitimate platform for making millions but it robs the players of any kind of gaming substance. You don't need to write a good story, make pretty graphics or an addictive mechanic when you can just slap on a pay-2-win, lootboxerific play style. The business model is making games crap. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by CaptainCanadian

[IntelliMission]

As the official Spanish translator of a major hidden object mobile game, I must say I agree with @CaptainCanadian. (I also think it's a good idea to extend the question from "consoles" to "gaming systems").

 

I was also forced to play the game and not only it is terrible (hidden objects games are like the bastard son of graphic adventures where you only do pixel hunting in hi-res), but the pay-to-win system should be illegal.

 

I know people who play that game regularly and they say that it turns much more difficult after some weeks-months, to the point that it's stressing. I guess that's how they make that 5-10% of the players buy the boosters and bonuses.

Edited August 21, 2020 by IntelliMission

[Hwlngmad]

This is tough one for me as I happen to like pretty much every console that I have ever used.  However, that being said, I would have to say that the "worst" console I ever played on was, admittingly, the Odyssey 2.  I do like the Odyssey 2 and there are some very good games on it, such as Smithereens.  That has got to be one of the best two player games ever imo.  However, when compared to the experiences that others have offered, I have to go with it.  However, again, while it was the "worst" console I played on, it does mean it wasn't any good and or worth while.  Definitely there is a lot of fun to be had on the system, especially with two player games such as Smithereens and even Basketball.  I know that my son and I had some very intense games of Basketball, which was hella fun.

[+thegoldenband]

5 hours ago, Hwlngmad said:

This is tough one for me as I happen to like pretty much every console that I have ever used.  However, that being said, I would have to say that the "worst" console I ever played on was, admittingly, the Odyssey 2.  I do like the Odyssey 2 and there are some very good games on it, such as Smithereens.  That has got to be one of the best two player games ever imo.  However, when compared to the experiences that others have offered, I have to go with it.  However, again, while it was the "worst" console I played on, it does mean it wasn't any good and or worth while.  Definitely there is a lot of fun to be had on the system, especially with two player games such as Smithereens and even Basketball.  I know that my son and I had some very intense games of Basketball, which was hella fun.

If it weren't for Smithereens I'd probably consider picking the O2, but that game comes close to "killer app" status IMHO, especially with The Voice. It's the kind of easy-to-grasp fun that pre-crash consoles did so well at their best. I do like Pick Axe Pete and Killer Bees as well.

 

I guess the worst console I've played is probably the Microvision, though I need to check out Sea Duel (supposedly the Microvision's best game). If emulation counts, then it'd be the Studio II, though bizarrely I do have a bunch of Studio II carts -- just no console.

[+thegoldenband]

...my word, I really do repeat myself, don't I? Yikes!

 

On 12/2/2015 at 1:31 PM, thegoldenband said:

The Odyssey² has a handful of cool games, like Pick Axe Pete, Killer Bees, and especially Smithereens. It's also got some of the worst games I've ever played, e.g. Hockey/Soccer, but the presence of a few great games really tips the scales.

 

I guess the Microvision is the worst console or handheld I've physically played, i.e. not in emulation. But even that has one killer app (Sea Duel), and any system with a killer app isn't really a failure. More to the point, it basically succeeds in what it's trying to do: it's a lo-res handheld for playing simple monochrome games, and it does that reasonably well.

 

If I'm not interested in doing that, why am I playing a Microvision in the first place? It'd be like blaming a goat for not being a cow.

 

So what system completely fails to meet its own goals, or had goals that were stupid in the first place? Hard to imagine the Studio II isn't a top candidate here, but I haven't played the real hardware so I reserve judgment (I do own a handful of games for the system, bizarrely enough).

 

[Steven Pendleton]

The worst system I have played is an emulation Famiclone that looks like a Game Boy with too many buttons that my boss from my previous job gave me as a going-away gift. It's actually pretty decent for what it is and has some nice games on it and a pretty good screen, but the d-pad is pretty terrible. It's not unplayable, though, and I enjoy playing the shogi game that it has on it.

 

For non-emulator-with-stolen-games type systems, I suppose I'd have to choose the 32X, if that counts as its own system. I don't think I need to explain why.

 

If that doesn't count as its own system, I tried my friend's Game Gear for several minutes like 25 years ago and decided that it wasn't for me. I've never really played a system that I would say is "bad" except the 32X, and even that has some good games and slightly improves the base system's video quality.

[adamchevy]

The more I’ve thought about the worst it has to be my iPhone. I’ve even tried it with a PS4 controller...still hate it. If I’m going to sit down and play Call of Duty with a controller I’d rather play on a screen bigger than 6.7”. The XS Max even has OLED and it’s still not fun for some reason. Maybe I’m just used to having a third class experience when playing on a phone and it’s tainted my view? Maybe I’m spoiled. Whatever the reason I really detest the experience.

[newtmonkey]

If handhelds count, it's the Game Gear by far.  I never had one back in the day and decided to get one last year, from a seller who replaced all the caps and even replaced the light tube with an LED.  When it arrived, I played it for maybe an hour or two and then threw it in storage never to be played again.

 

I found most games to be completely unplayable, as though they didn't develop them with the GG screen in mind.  The library is packed full of side-scrollers but they scroll too quickly for the screen, making it a blurry mess.  Unlike the GB and Lynx, which have razor-sharp screens that blur when something moves, the GG is blurry all the time.  I've read that it's basically outputting a composite video signal to the screen, which explains a lot.

[Lost Dragon]

19 minutes ago, newtmonkey said:

If handhelds count, it's the Game Gear by far.  I never had one back in the day and decided to get one last year, from a seller who replaced all the caps and even replaced the light tube with an LED.  When it arrived, I played it for maybe an hour or two and then threw it in storage never to be played again.

 

I found most games to be completely unplayable, as though they didn't develop them with the GG screen in mind.  The library is packed full of side-scrollers but they scroll too quickly for the screen, making it a blurry mess.  Unlike the GB and Lynx, which have razor-sharp screens that blur when something moves, the GG is blurry all the time.  I've read that it's basically outputting a composite video signal to the screen, which explains a lot.

Mentioned just a short while ago, Sam Tramiel saying Sega screwed the chips with Game Gear and it suffered screen blur. 

 

Out of the GB, GG and Lynx, owned all 3,for myself, GB was easily the worst. 

 

Screen was sharp, but no matter how much i adjusted the display settings, I could never get an image I was at all happy with. 

 

Game Gear screen was flaky and had bad ghosting, but i could play for hours on it. 

 

GB minutes at best. 

[rayik]

I've acquired a number of systems. Most disappointing to me was the Emerson Arcadia 2001.  To me it does not compare well to other systems of the same era.

Edited August 23, 2020 by rayik
Fixed spelling errors

[turboxray]

On 8/19/2020 at 1:45 PM, carlsson said:

Ok, so by 1989 Nintendo still hadn't got their sh*t together when it came to quality control on what they released. I know the NES lived on a few years in the 1990's which would mean for 2/3 of its commercial life, Nintendo published just about anything they had access to and not until they also had the SNES to cater to, they put more effort into the later NES games... or?

That's the dumbest thing I've read in this thread hahah.

[turboxray]

On 8/20/2020 at 6:22 AM, Bill Loguidice said:

I strongly disagree. It had some really great games on it and a library of 300+ titles. I'd say it was easily the best of that generation of consoles, which included the CD-i and Jaguar, which, although not saying much, is still something to consider when saying something was the "worst". There are easily far worse consoles both before and after it.

Wait what?! Is this like a mini-generation thing? Because it either belongs with the 4th generation or thr 5th gen, but it's in no way the best of neither. Not even close. The 3DO was an impressive let down. 

[Bill Loguidice]

12 minutes ago, turboxray said:

Wait what?! Is this like a mini-generation thing? Because it either belongs with the 4th generation or thr 5th gen, but it's in no way the best of neither. Not even close. The 3DO was an impressive let down. 

Use whatever generational guidelines you wish. There's nothing definitive. In my opinion, compared to its peers, it was the best example from its short-lived era.