What's the Worst Console You Ever Played?

[bretthorror]

Except when I stated that I found the NES to be the worst console I have played (not the worst console ever made, just the worst console I have played) - you called me delusional, and fanboy, and several other insults.

 

I didn't even quote or direct my comments at you. You just out of the blue insulted me. So please - cut it out. You're not trying to be intelligent or respectful here.

 

You clearly are a delusional fanboy. I won't treat your opinions with respect because of it. You seem like a smart guy, but your fanboy nature makes it so I can't respect your opinion. If you would sit back and say, sure, the NES had amazing games but I prefer the 7800 because you like arcade ports (of which there are better on NES, but we'll put that aside), I would say good for you. But you didn't. You attacked the NES library for every little reason you could because you for some reason hate them and choose to spew bullshit. I love that you love the 7800. I own a 7800, you know? I love Atari, Sega, Nintendo, Xbox, Playstation, Steam. I have no blindness. You do. If the NES is the worst console you've played, you obviously haven't played many systems or have a bias against Nintendo. That, I don't respect. I am the first to shit on NES fanboys for dismissing the SMS or Atari. But you ignore that fact, which makes me respect your opinion less. Because now you are attacking people like me who love it all but will admit that the NES library was better because clearly, it was. If you don't love Excitebike, Punch-Out, Mario, Kirby, etc then, no, I can't take you seriously. I admire and share your Atari enthusiasm but you don't need to prove it by negatively bashing NES. You dig, mon frere? You and I aren't so different except you hate Nintendo for reasons unknown.

 

 

But the thread isn't "What IS the worst system ever" it is "Whats the worst you've played"

 

Not all of us... actually NONE of us, had a 700 cartridge game collection sitting in the closet and we could hand pick and play the best titles whenever we wanted to.

As I stated in my post about not liking the NES very much as a kid is completely honest, For every one game me and my friends played and liked, we played 3 or 4 that we didn't.

As a child that just left me being happy with my Sega Master System. Where there was only 1 game I played and didn't like... Marksmoon Shooting/Trap Shooting... granted I only played about 20 games total back in those days, but I enjoyed 19 of them.

I also only played roughly 30-40 NES games back then, and only REALLY enjoyed roughly 8-12 of them...

Again, as stated in my post and as the AVGN's schtick is mainly composed of and to paraphrase a quote by him that he's used more than once... "Wasn't it great, when the weekend came, it was friday night, you rented a game, brought it home and it JUST SUCKED!!!!". This was an experience me and my friends had sooo many times.

 

As kids, me and my friends would pull out the box of atari carts (this was circa 1985-1988, so I'm guessing the Crash explained why older siblings/cousins always had a TON of games they were willing to give away; they got a bunch when they were cheap and were now giving them away since they had a newer/'better' system) and the box, be it mine, my friends, whoever, always had 20-30 games and we would sit there playing each and every game for 10-20 minutes then play another and another... never being pissed that one just SUCKED, the worst that happened was we didn't understand it. Then after the 8-bit era came the 16-bit days, I was a Teenager and LOVED the whole Sega VS Nintendo war of the time (I chose Sega Genesis and stayed a "Sega Fanboy" at the time untill moving on to a 486 PC, based soley on my childhood experiences). It was a time when I loved gaming on my Sega Genesis.

 

I loved gaming on my 2600jr, my C64, my SMS, my Genesis, and my PC... gaming on the NES was like buying scratch tickets, it was fun when you struck lucky, but you often felt like you just wasted your money again.

 

Sure, I can look back and say "Yeah, there were MANY good games released for the NES", but when it came to BUYING games back in 88-92, you didn't just go to Walmart and say "OK, I want SMB3, Zelda, MegaMan 2, Etc..." You might not have even known MegaMan existed, let alone ask for it or be on the hunt to buy it. You picked from the 10-20 games they had on the shelf... same when renting... sometimes (and you didn't know it) EVERY game on the shelf was one that today is known as being sub-par or a real stinker, but you picked one, because you wanted something new to play, and then were let down because it was not as good as you were expecting/hoping.

 

*EDIT

 

 

 

 

 

So you ARE saying that the majority of the UK and Europe who had no interest in the NES... WERE actually being unintelligent!!!

WOW... You've jumped the shark worse than 78001987 now... you're not just calling out a system's fanbase, but whole NATIONS...

 

I stated in the very post you quoted that anyone could have had a great time with 7800 games, but you chose to omit that to benefit your own argument. It's just not the system you'd choose in comparison for the vast majority of gamers. That's why the NES sold so many more consoles than the rest. I actually asked for a SMS for Christmas when I was 4-5 because my cousin had one. He told my parents to buy me a NES instead because no one was making games for the SMS anymore. He was entirely right and I am thankful my parents listened to him and not me. I am one of the few people who loves the SMS along with the NES so you're barking up the wrong tree. However, I could never disrespect the NES library. You said of the 30-40 games you played, you REALLY enjoyed 12. That's a pretty great track record considering the competition only had about 200 games combined as opposed to the NES library. And you couldn't enjoy 12 7800 exclusives that much because they just don't exist. I love my Sega Master System. I just can't tell you it's better than my NES. It's the ultimate compliment to my NES collection, though. It's unfortunate that we all bought/rented poor games back in the day, but no matter what the NES library title for title outdoes the others. I own nearly ever console from the beginning of video games to the current crop. The last system I bought was a 7800 a couple months ago. Reason being is it didn't offer anything exclusive to make it worth owning, because no one in 2016 can argue it does. I spent $150 (Canadian) to merely TRY a Bally Astrocade when I bought one. I obviously am all for underdog consoles.

 

I told you in the post that you conveniently didn't quote that it's hard not to enjoy a video game system. The popularity of UK PC's lumps right into this. It doesn't necessarily mean they got the best stuff as a whole or that it wasn't amazing. It doesn't even matter that they didn't miss those games because they had a great alternative, but that still means you're demeaning the NES library, which doesn't score you any points. If a retro gamer says the NES library is shit, his opinion is shit. End of story. I never said those PCs had shit libraries or you couldn't have fun with them. In fact, I spoke quite the contrary to that.

 

The common denominator is you and 7800 are picking at people like dicks. Because while you might stab a NES fanboy in the eye, and fuck, I'd encourage it, you also dismiss people like me who defend everything and are just trying to be objective and realistic in the process which doesn't do you any favors. Commodore, Amiga, they all died out for a reason, it's just the truth. It sucks, but looking at things objectively, it happened for a reason.

[Osgeld]

Commodore was the maker of Amiga, and it mostly disappeared because of mismanagement and it couldn't shake its toy image, at least here in the states (course I always flashback to computer chonicles, "so whats the new amiga's graphics and sound good for outside of games" here let me show you this awesome game! ... doofs)

 

please continue your epic ... whatever this is

Edited January 16, 2016 by Osgeld

[bretthorror]

Commodore was the maker of Amiga, and it mostly disappeared because of mismanagement and it couldn't shake its toy image, at least here in the states (course I always flashback to computer chonicles, "so whats the new amiga's graphics and sound good for outside of games" here let me show you this awesome game! ... doofs)

 

please continue your epic ... whatever this is

 

Put your Amiga disc into my PC and let's play it.

[Osgeld]

I have never owned an amiga, maybe one day

Edited January 16, 2016 by Osgeld

[Torr]

 

I love my Sega Master System. I just can't tell you it's better than my NES.

 

I don't want you to either.

 

I want YOU to like what YOU like, and let OTHER people like what THEY like.

 

You REALLY seem to be missing the actual point/topic of this thread.

It is NOT what IS the best console. That is NOT what the OP asked.

 

But you just can't seem to get that.

 

Considering the thread's title, if someone only ever played 2 systems in their life, say the Sega Genesis and the Super NES... they would invariable have to say that one of those two was the worst. They aren't saying it's the worst system ever... it's just the worst they've played.

 

I'm not sure what you think or have to say about that, but that's it, thats logic right there in the above paragraph.

I also don't care what you think or have to say about it and plan not opening this thread again till it hits 30 pages...

Then I might open it one day for some fun reading! Fun in the same sense as watching Jerry Springer or Maury Povich!

 

The point is ANYBODY is allowed to like or dislike whatever they want. PERIOD.

 

To quote, I think it was Andy Warhol? I'm sure you'll correct me though:

Please, close this thread of dick, I broke.

[AtariTexas]

Man, I am seriously rockin out to some Megadeth

[mikey.shake]

That Jakks Pacific "Atari 10-in-1" joystick from the early 2000s. The games didn't FEEL right to me. And including paddle games made no sense. But I suppose that thing not quite "cutting it" is what finally pushed me to get a real Atari console... so some good came of it.

 

I was gonna say "Odyssey 2", but it's got a scrappy charm I like despite technical limitations. It succeeds (mostly) in doing what it sets out to do, so I can't hate on it, even if I prefer the Atari library.

 

Oh, and this thread has been most entertaining. Quite bonkers, in fact.

[78001987]

This thread looks like it went on a diet.

 

Sanitized, for your protection.

[mbd30]

This thread looks like it went on a diet.

Sanitized, for your protection.

It was getting to the point where a thread lock wasn't a bad idea.

[Dashopepper]

...and I knew that the NES was kind of "cheating" by making the playfield graphics smaller. It always bugged me that lots of NES games cheaped out like that and used scams/tricks to try and compete, when they really were very limited. This is another example of my lack of respect for the NES...

 

It's fun to read through a thread like this every once and awhile to blow off some steam and I don't blame anyone for posting some dislike for a system they feel threatened by. As long as every thread doesn't start looking like this . One thing I will say is I should give the 7800 another look. I never realized it had such a passionate following. For some reason I've always viewed it as a novel way to play 2600 games.

 

I find that the best way to stop hating a system is to spend more time playing games on it.

[mbd30]

 

It's fun to read through a thread like this every once and awhile to blow off some steam and I don't blame anyone for posting some dislike for a system they feel threatened by. As long as every thread doesn't start looking like this . One thing I will say is I should give the 7800 another look. I never realized it had such a passionate following. For some reason I've always viewed it as a novel way to play 2600 games.

 

I find that the best way to stop hating a system is to spend more time playing games on it.

 

It's Atari that has the passionate following, and it's the Atari 7800 that happened to be competing against Nintendo.

Edited January 16, 2016 by mbd30

[Osgeld]

Its pretty rare I keep consoles around im not a collector, I emulate most everything, but if I were stuck on a desert island and I was given the choice of a 7800 with 5 random games and a NES with 5 random games...

 

that's a hard one, I lean more to the 7800 cause I would need quick and simple games to occupy my starving mind between fighting smoke monsters and wild boars for food, and the NES does have a higher crap to gold ratio

Edited January 16, 2016 by Osgeld

[BassGuitari]

...the NES does have a higher crap to gold ratio

 

The NES's and 7800's crap:gold ratios are probably closer than people think. If the 7800 had as many games as the NES did, it's a safe bet most of them would be crap, too. Take any system that has hundreds and hundreds of games and most of those games will be garbage.

[mbd30]

Its pretty rare I keep consoles around im not a collector, I emulate most everything, but if I were stuck on a desert island and I was given the choice of a 7800 with 5 random games and a NES with 5 random games...

 

that's a hard one, I lean more to the 7800 cause I would need quick and simple games to occupy my starving mind between fighting smoke monsters and wild boars for food, and the NES does have a higher crap to gold ratio

That particular scenario favors the 7800 against the NES.

[empsolo]

Personally, I think people tend to overblow the amount of crap games on the NES. There are a lot of great and under appreciated hidden gems on the system.

[PhoenixMoonPatrol]

N/M. Misunderstood the topic. Meh

Edited January 17, 2016 by PhoenixMoonPatrol

[VectorGamer]

Arcade purists who demand that all games conform to the arcade standard.

 

"This console game sucks because it looks and plays like the arcade game" - said nobody ever

[mbd30]

 

"This console game sucks because it looks and plays like the arcade game" - said nobody ever

 

True. It's also true that console games don't have to be exactly like their arcade counterparts in order to be good in their own right. E.g. NES "Double Dragon" is a solid one player experience despite lacking the arcade's two player simultaneous.

Edited January 18, 2016 by mbd30

[Bill Loguidice]

At the time, arcade accuracy was incredibly important. Obviously, these days, with emulators like MAME or similar, we can have the real code running, so arcade accuracy on vintage consoles is nowhere near as important, although that's obviously the goal of many a homebrew. In any case, this modern day ability does allow us to appreciate classic arcade conversions in a whole new way. We no longer have to care about how accurate the arcade conversion is, but instead how much fun it is or what it brings all on its own to the experience. That's why, for instance, a library like the ColecoVision's can be appreciated even more today, because it wasn't able to perfectly replicate the arcade experience and created its own type of experiences. So yes, I personally agree that it's a good thing that liberties were taken with NES (and other) conversions, because it gives us more reason to play the game today rather than have to nitpick what it didn't get right.

[CatPix]

Plus, because of the limitations of every system, trying to repliacte the arcade experience as close as possible could make the game feel wrong. Or look wrong.

For example, the resolution of arcade Double Dragon is 256*240.

It's a perfect match with the NES resolution, but not with the 7800.

Plus, the arcade can display more colors, have a beefier CPU, better sound, etc.

Or take Space Invaders.

It's an old game, a very classic one. But you will not have it arcade perfect on a home console (not a retro one).

Because the original arcade one had no colors. The colors you see in the arcade are strips of tinted plastic applied to the CRT.

So on retro systems with a limited palette, how do you render that exactly?

And the sound hardware part partly analog, custom.

 

Some of you are going to ask "does it really matters?" and well. no. The important thing is that what you have to play with is fun, and offer a decent gameplay experience.

[Two-in-the-Belfry]

This should really be renamed the "Arguing About the 7800" thread.

[empsolo]

 

"This console game sucks because it looks and plays like the arcade game" - said nobody ever

Ninja Gaiden for the Lynx says hi.

Edited January 19, 2016 by empsolo

[Schizophretard]

I find it hard to take anyone seriously that states any successful, mainstream video game console is the worst they have ever played. Either it's complete ignorance (i.e., lack of in-depth, first-hand experience, be it self imposed or not), or they are intentionally looking to get a reaction out of people (i.e., trolling).

But if in their opinion it is the worst console they ever played then couldn't they not get to the point of having an in-depth experience because their early impressions of it were negative enough to not motivate them to go in-depth? For an example, after thinking hard on it I'm going to have to go with the PS3 which I admit I haven't had as in-depth of experience as I did with the first two but that is because it didn't live up to my expectations. Granted, if I did get very in-depth with it I'm sure that I would rank it higher than many consoles including many mentioned here but many of those consoles I would already have a lower standard for going in and going in to one that I have very high standards for like the PS3 but then being disappointed from it not living up to my expectations I would rank worse than consoles that I had lower expectations for.

 

I loved the PS1. It made it very easy to love the PS2 right away without even needing to know a single game for it because the backwards compatibility for the games and accessories was so well done that I could think of it as an upgrade similar to going from the Atari 2600 to the 7800 or the Game Boy to the Game Boy color which is how I thought of it.

 

It was this initial upgraded PS1 that could completely replace my PS1 that made the transition easy and made me love it for that before I loved it for the things that were exclusively PS2.

 

So, that set a standard and definition for me of what a third PlayStation would mean. It meant an upgraded PS2 that could completely replace my PS2 and I could automatically love it for those reasons alone and then love it more later for what is exclusively PS3 about it. To put that another way, it meant not having any worries about being an early adopter because you are just upgrading something you already adopted.

 

It didn't live up to that expectation this time though. When I asked for a PS3 for Christmas I had to make sure it was one of the models that was backwards compatible with both of them. That already left a bad taste in my mouth before even getting it because full backwards compatibility for all models seemed as necessarily as all models using a controller.

 

Then after getting it and thinking it would be all good the wireless controllers, lack of PlayStation's standard controller ports, and lack of memory card slots caused annoying issues that I didn't anticipate.

 

The lack of controller ports made all of my controllers incompatible. This was very annoying with the Guitar Hero guitars because it felt like I just now got done spoiling my wife with the entire Guitar Hero collection and now would have to have both PlayStations hooked up at the same time which defeats the purpose of the upgrade. I just didn't get how prior to the PS3 a wireless controller was always an option that most didn't choose for consoles and then all of a sudden it is mandatory with the wired controllers not even being an option. Most of the issues with wired controllers were already solved. The PS2 controllers already had wires of good length and you could buy extension cables for them if that wasn't enough which it usually was. So, increased distances was no longer much of a selling point for wireless. Then there is people accidentally tripping over and pulling out the cords. PlayStation controller ports have little tubes that make the controller slide out easily in those situations instead of breaking pins or pulling the console on the ground. The only thing the PS3 seems to add to that is if a controller gets unpaired it automatically pauses but I see no reason why they couldn't apply the same function to a cord being pulled out. The PS3 should have included controller ports along with wireless capability instead of trying to fix something that isn't broken by making the solution mandatory.

 

Then I had issues with the wireless controllers in and of themselves. They are proprietary and not exactly designed to easily swap out for others that are already charged. At least with the Wii, which makes sense to have wireless controllers because of motion controls, you had the option of AAA batteries or rechargeable ones. But with the PS3 I always felt like I had to babysit the batteries like with cell phones and most of the time ended up playing with the charging wire plugged in which takes things back to issues that have already been solved with wired controllers by going back to Atari CX-40 length because short is an understatement for how short the included charging cable is. We didn't have USB wall chargers everywhere back then. So, my solution was to buy a charging dock that also had a USB port for the short plug. My plan was to keep it right by where I would play and if the battery died as it often did with many controllers I tried then I could play it plugged in with the short charging wire on that. That solution worked a little better but wasn't ideal. Eventually I found a long USB extension cord at Goodwill and would use that but if I'm using a wireless controller like a wired one then why not just include a controller port?

 

Then there is the issue with it constantly either wanting to do a long check for system errors because apparently going directly to the power switch isn't how it wants to shut down or it is wanting to do an hour long firmware update before I can play anything. WTF is this? A console or Windows?

 

I wouldn't have to make virtual PS1 and 2 memory cards and could use past saved data if they just included memory card slots.

 

PlayStation Plus annoyed me. I thought when I bought the cards it meant that anything with a price cost something and the freebies that come with it are actually free. But it turned out that once the card expired I would lose the freebie games which means I was really paying for a subscription.

 

Within about 3 months my PS3 died. Sony handled it well. They sent a well packaged box relatively fast and returned my repaired one just as quickly. But still, I'm a retro gamer used to consoles taking a beating and this was the first time a brand new console just completely died on me like that. It lowered my consumer confidence in its longevity and motivation to buy a huge collection of games because 30 years from now they may not be playable.

 

Space heater! This sucker puts off major heat. So much so that I'm impressed that it still works today and that I haven't had to send it back for repairs again. During the summer it fights against the AC making it uncomfortably hot in here and during the winter I have turned it on for the sole purpose of using it as a space heater. I'm kind of cold right now but not too bad but if I turned it on then in an hour I'll be sweating. This is scary fire hazard hot and has been since day one. I find it kind of ironic that it has a fan inside and yet they have third party external fans for it. I'm impressed that it hasn't melted itself though.

 

I also have issues with the external design. I don't like the glossy finger print dust and scratch collecting plastic. It makes it look cheap. Even in perfect dust, finger print, and scratch free condition it looks cheap to me. I don't know how to describe it but that kind of plastic looks cheap, flimsy, easily breakable, generic, fragile, etc. to me. The bezel around my TV is the same stuff and looks just as crappy to me. I guess the best way to describe it is the look gives that cheap feeling I get from the plastic of a 5200's controller compartment. It looks like it could fall once and would smash. This is another case of if it isn't broke then don't fix it for me because the textured plastic of the previous PlayStations was perfect. If it feels like an Atari 2600 cart then it is quality plastic and if it feels like a water bottle it is cheap junk. The rounded top doesn't make its standing or laying down positions as convertible as the PS2. The PS2 was flat laying down. I could lay the case of a game I'm playing on it, I could set the controllers on it, I could set a cock on it, etc. But this rounded top seems to serve no purpose other than creating more surface area to see the crappy plastic. If it was flat you could set a PS2 on it since apparently the PS3 wasn't meant to completely replace it.

 

I could probably keep on going but my point is that this very mainstream highly regarded console is the worst I ever played because out of all of them that I have put this high of expectations on I wasn't this disappointed after getting them. Granted, I'm sure it has an excellent library but I didn't buy it for the potential future library as an early adopter but bought based on what the PlayStation brand means to me as a past adopter and fan. Imagine if the Super NES had the exact same cartridge port and controller ports as the NES with full backwards compatibility and then the N64 was named the Mega NES with the same cartridge port, no controller ports, and the backwards compatibility was either not present or wasn't as ideal as the Super NES was. It is a lot like that for me because the Super NES would have established my standards for the Mega NES and any type of future NESes. If the Mega NES was suppose to be something different then they should call it something like the N64 without setting a standard like that with the previous Super NES which is what happened. Or to use another analogy, imagine if the original Nintendo DS was called the Nintendo Game Boy DS. It would have gave the expectation that it would be fully backwards compatible like all of the previous Game Boys and that backwards compatibility would have became part of the definition of what a Game Boy is. In other words, if they called it something different like the Sony Centauri or just something other than a PlayStation then I would have had expectations of something new that couldn't disappoint me of not living up to what a PlayStation means to me. It would have nothing prior to live up to other than the Sony name and I would approach it like the PS2 was the end of the PlayStation line because they are making a console that is something entirely new.

 

I have used it more as a Blu-ray player than a console and that isn't because I like movies more than games but because I was so disappointed that I didn't have the same previous excitement I had with the previous two to give me the motivation to go in-depth with exploring the library to see what it had to offer. It is kind of like if I thought I was getting a PS3 but in the box was an XBOX 360 when I have never had any interested in Microsoft's consoles and therefore I wouldn't have much interest in exploring the library.

 

So, do you take me seriously or am I just trolling?

[CatPix]

So, do you take me seriously or am I just trolling?

I think you simply missed the previous post he was answerin globally to, which were mostly those :

 

NES.

Awful controls, clunky way of inserting cartridges, which then don't work, square ugly looking grey box.

 

 

NES. Hands down the most overhyped, disappointing system I ever played. Poor graphicson many ports, terrible flicker, systems died or stopped reading carts regularly, every game was kiddie looking, controllers were uncomfortable with pointed corners and too small.

 

I do love watching NES fanboys flip their lids when someone disagrees with them though. Just because it was popular doesn't mean it was good. Reality TV and Karaoke game shows are incredibly popular now, and that stuff is for morons.

 

Your statement point out things that you, personnally, thing are undesirable things. You explain why the wireless pads are a bad thing for you, you explain that you wanted backward compatibily and that it was ahmpered by the lack of Memory Card and Gamepad ports, you explain that it's heating alot, that the design doesn't please you.

You use either facts, or personnal feelings to express your dislike of this system, and this is fine.

 

I think that I need no explanation as why those two comments are merely trolling, and not comparable to your own explanation about the experience you had with the PS3.

[Bill Loguidice]

CatPix said it perfectly. Also, I think even you, Schizophretard, would admit that your "extreme" dislike of the PS3 is as much about you having very particular and specific expectations that were probably quite difficult for it to meet.

 

By the way, you can of course use the PS3 controllers as wired controllers if you for some reason you really wanted to (although I have to say I NEVER want to go back to wired controllers), and there are controller and memory card adapters to use PS2 stuff on the PS3.

 

I also agree that the first version of the PS3 (I have one, as well as a later slim) is noisy and runs too hot (and I'm still upset that they took away the ability to run Linux and how obnoxious the update process is), but I think as an early adopter of any technology we do have to put up with some things that aren't quite perfected yet.