EGM's Top Ten Consoles of All Time

Did they take influence on the industry into account? That would make the top 2 more obvious I suppose.

I personally wouldn't do that in the best systems though. I'd just want to say what's the best, for gaming, not what effect they had.
 
SomeDude said:
At times like these I'm so glad Sony knocked Sega the fuck out of the console business.

Ouch. I wouldn't give Sony all the credit for knocking Sega out of the hardware biz. I'd blame bad decisions (32X, SCD, Game Gear, and certain decisions regarding the Saturn) more than Sony.

Ken Kutaragi was just there put drive the final nail into the Sega coffin. The damage had already been done.
 
Mama Smurf said:
I'm trying to think of a single genre where the best NES game is better than the best SNES one and failing miserably.

Except, perhaps, for SMB3 over SMW in some people's mind. But you get an enhanced version on the SNES too, so that kinda kills that one.

Little Nemo alone > SNES lineup
^Fact
 
AniHawk said:
Little Nemo alone > SNES lineup
^Fact

it was a great game. NES = Metroid, Kid icarus, smb 1 -> 3, Zelda 1& 2, Castlevania 1-> 3 , double dragon etc the list could be endless. Yeah I think the NES was better than snes.
 
PC Gaijin said:
Did EGM give the criteria they used to compile the list? Is it based on historical significance, sales, game library, what? I agree that NES and Playstation should be in the top 3 (I even agree with the ordering NES > Playstation), but where the fuck are any systems prior to the NES? In particular, the Atari 2600 should be in the top 3, certainly somewhere in that list of 10 (how can you include systems like Xbox and Gamecube and not the 2600?).

From looking at the magazine, I believe they only included consoles that they have covered (thus the lack of Atari stuff). Besides that I guess they just pulled stuff from their asses.
 
SantaCruZer said:
if you say so ;)

Maybe it's just me, but I like controllers that don't require a high-powered microscope in order to find key components, like the D-Pad, for example. I also like normal buttons, not oddly-shapen ones that don't even feel right... or buttons that always feel like they're broken (B button)...

IMO, the GC controller is the worst sham since the Colecovision controller... and those were pretty bad.
 
AniHawk said:
N64 had some classics. Games that people still hold as the best above most, but the Dreamcast, in some eyes, is a classic in itself. Where the Saturn has the stench of failure, the Dreamcast felt like Sega was going down in a blaze of glory. I think that's what attracted so many "g33ks" to it in the first place, and why they still place it heads and shoulders above others.
the main reason for the general sense of the dreamcast itself being a classic is simple.

"g33ks" = pirates

hard to nail it down to a few classic games when you play a few hundred...
 
bitwise said:
ranked

10. Nintendo 64
9. Dreamcast
8. Gamecube
7. Genesis
6. Xbox
5. Playstation 2
4. Game Boy Advance
3. Super NES
2. Playstation
1. Nintendo Entertainment System

=0

Most nostalgiac <> best

ug, that's like all those lists that rank DOOM over Half-Life and Halo. Gag.
 
well, at least the snes wasn't number one. what an inexplicably overrated console. i'd rather have an nes than any console save saturn. solid choice.
 
SantaCruZer said:
it was a great game. NES = Metroid, Kid icarus, sbm 1 -> 3, Zelda 1& 2, Castlevania 1-> 3 , double dragon etc the list could be endless. Yeah I think the NES was better than snes.

Super Metroid, Yoshi's Island, Tetris Attack, Chrono Trigger, Zelda: LttP, FFVI, Secret of Mana, lots others say stfu :p
 
Mama Smurf said:
Did they take influence on the industry into account? That would make the top 2 more obvious I suppose.

I personally wouldn't do that in the best systems though. I'd just want to say what's the best, for gaming, not what effect they had.

I think you raise (another) valid point. Depending on the criteria, the lists can be very different.

Sure, the SNES did pretty much everything better than its older brother, but the older brother was mostly responsible for a lot of what the SNES had to offer. My own personal list has the NES at #1, the SNES at #2, and the PlayStation at #3. The difference between the three (for me, obviously) is very slim.
 
DJPS2 said:
Maybe it's just me, but I like controllers that don't require a high-powered microscope in order to find key components, like the D-Pad, for example. I also like normal buttons, not oddly-shapen ones that don't even feel right... or buttons that always feel like they're broken (B button)...

IMO, the GC controller is the worst sham since the Colecovision controller... and those were pretty bad.

There must be something wrong with your hands.
 
Mama Smurf said:
There must be something wrong with your hands.

Nope... all of the other controllers that I've used over the last 25 years have been pretty much OK... but thanks for the concern.
 
Well... Are they including EVERYTHING, even import games and overseas influence? Or are they just looking at the American market? If it's the latter, I guess I can understand the Saturn not being on there...
 
Screaming_Gremlin said:
From looking at the magazine, I believe they only included consoles that they have covered (thus the lack of Atari stuff). Besides that I guess they just pulled stuff from their asses.

Well, very early on EGM did cover Atari (barely). They had an Atari column that covered 2600 and 7800 games. This lasted only a few issues until the Lynx came out. Still, I'm puzzled by the inexplicable lack of any systems prior to the NES.

Raw64life said:
This list seems more like a most financially successful consoles list more than a greatest consoles list.

If that were the case the Dreamcast and Xbox would have no business being on the list :)
 
come to think of it, the major nes franchises generally got worse in the transition to snes. it was the gamecube of its time...sort of. certainly zelda, metroid, castlevania, mega man, and gradius were vastly better on nes. mario and contra are arguably better on snes. and that's about it. oh, and i guess final fantasy and dragon quest. but screw that genre.
 
I can understand the D pad thing. I've never had a problem myself, but they are getting smaller on Nintendo systems, so I could see why people do.

But the B button feeling like it's broken? Maybe your B button is broken, as it feels like the rest to me. I love the oddly shapen buttons. It helps me remember controls quicker. I never had a huge problem learning controls on other systems or anything, but it is still quicker. I love the triggers too, they feel perfect. The shape of it is great, it really does just melt into your hands (corny, but I'm just trying to get across how comfortable it is). The Z button's stupid.

I think the GC pad's main problem is its differences with more popular systems. So obviously games are going to be designed round a Dual Shock rather than a GC pad, and suffer when ported. If the PS2 had a GC like pad, I think a lot of problems would disappear.

Now if you want a controller which feels like a cheap piece of crap, look no further than the DC's. Even that was perfectly managable though.
 
I don't agree with the N64 being below the Xbox. N64 had fewer games, but it's top ten easily destroys the Xbox top ten.
 
drohne said:
come to think of it, the major nes franchises generally got worse in the transition to snes. it was the gamecube of its time...sort of. certainly zelda, metroid, castlevania, mega man, and gradius were vastly better on nes. mario and contra are arguably better on snes. and that's about it. oh, and i guess final fantasy and dragon quest. but screw that genre.

You are so, so wrong. Except Castlevania. And maybe Gradius, I haven't played the series.

I don't even know why I bother though, as far as I can remember we've never agreed on anything. Ever.
 
Well to be more detailed about the criteria here is the exact crap they have in the magazine.

The hit parade toward EGM's 200th issue continues this month with another painfully controversial ranking: the top 10 consoles we've covered over the past 16 years (based on their game libraries, not stuff like DVD playback, backwards compatibility, etc.). Fights have already broken out in the office lunchroom over this list -- check out EGM's message boards to join the fray.
 
I respectfully take issue with the N64's position on that chart. It had numerous "best game of all time" contenders, imo. It should be higher, certainly higher than Xbox or GC (as I much as I like them).
 
Mama Smurf said:
I can understand the D pad thing. I've never had a problem myself, but they are getting smaller on Nintendo systems, so I could see why people do.

But the B button feeling like it's broken? Maybe your B button is broken, as it feels like the rest to me. I love the oddly shapen buttons. It helps me remember controls quicker. I never had a huge problem learning controls on other systems or anything, but it is still quicker. I love the triggers too, they feel perfect. The shape of it is great, it really does just melt into your hands (corny, but I'm just trying to get across how comfortable it is). The Z button's stupid.

I think the GC pads main problem is that it's differences with more popular systems. So obviously games are going to be designed round a Dual Shock rather than a GC pad, and suffer when ported. If the PS2 had a GC like pad, I think a lot of problems would disappear.

Now if you want a controller which feels like a cheap piece of crap, look no further than the DC's. Even that was perfectly managable though.

The triggers are the controller's best asset... I certainly won't debate that.

To me, the oddly-shaped buttons make the controller feel foreign. They're not exactly where I expect them to be, and after becoming accustomed to the same general controller layout for almost 10 years now, it's more than mildly uncomfortable...

Which leads to the bolded part of your quote, which I really cannot deny. Although the controller was fine for playing the few first-party games that I had actually enjoyed on the GC, multiplatform games were literally unplayable for me. Although it could be argued that the GC versions of multiplatform games looked (at least) marginally better than the PS2 versions, the controls never felt as tight or intuitive as they did on the PS2... and with the XBox controller layout being nearly identical, XBox ports have never been a problem.
 
Mama Smurf said:
Super Metroid, Yoshi's Island, Tetris Attack, Chrono Trigger, Zelda: LttP, FFVI, Secret of Mana, lots others say stfu :p

And the NES started many of those franchises :P
 
the n64, gamecube, dreamcast, and xbox don't belong anywhere near that list. gamecube particularly. drop that dead weight and make room for the saturn, pc engine, neo geo, and...uh...ok, maybe keep the xbox at #10. gba was the first worthwhile handheld, but it's easily outclassed by any halfway-competent home console. it needs to drop several spots. genesis is patently a better console than the slowdown-ridden snes, the philistine's choice then and forever.
 
SantaCruZer said:
And the NES started many of those franchises :P

Like I say, I don't think these things should effect the list. I don't care about things like where the games first came from, how much influence they had etc. I just care about which game is better, this version, or that version. And amongst my favourite games, the SNES almost always wins.
 
I agree mostly with EGM's ranking, except the GBA is way too high (even counting GB/GBC libraries it should be behind Genesis IMO), and GC has no business being ahead of DC and N64.
 
drohne said:
genesis is patently a better console than the slowdown-ridden snes, the philistine's choice then and forever.

I don't know... I kinda didn't like how most Genesis games had sound quality equivalent to hearing them through a drive-thru speaker at McDonald's.

Granted, the SNES had slowdown problems where the Genesis didn't... but it wasn't so prevalent than it ruined gameplay in any way. I don't recall seeing slowdown in every SNES title, either.
 
drohne said:
gba was the first worthwhile handheld, but it's easily outclassed by any halfway-competent home console.

I don't know, it has a very solid library. For a good while this gen I was finding myself playing far more with my GBA than any other system.
 
drohne said:
the n64, gamecube, dreamcast, and xbox don't belong anywhere near that list. gamecube particularly. drop that dead weight and make room for the saturn, pc engine, nintendo ds, neo geo, and...uh...ok, maybe keep the xbox at #10. gba was the first worthwhile handheld, but it's easily outclassed by any halfway-competent home console. it needs to drop several spots. genesis is patently a better console than the slowdown-ridden snes, the philistine's choice then and forever.

Wow, I'm surprised at you.
 
I never got into shooters, so I'll believe you on that one. Never played many beat 'em ups before the MegaDrive either.

drohne is like the anti-me when it comes to our tastes. In fact, I dub thee Antithesis. I used a capital just to maintain our different choices you'll notice.
 
Screaming_Gremlin said:
Well to be more detailed about the criteria here is the exact crap they have in the magazine.

The hit parade toward EGM's 200th issue continues this month with another painfully controversial ranking: the top 10 consoles we've covered over the past 16 years (based on their game libraries, not stuff like DVD playback, backwards compatibility, etc.). Fights have already broken out in the office lunchroom over this list -- check out EGM's message boards to join the fray.

Hmm, if that's their criteria then the Gamecube and Xbox don't belong on that list by a long shot. Drop those two and add the PC Engine and Saturn.

And between the NES and SNES, I'll take an SNES version of a game almost any day. Yes, many of its franchises started on the NES, but they were perfected on the SNES. I find very few NES games still playable, but SNES is still perfectly playable. You get the best franchises and game mechanics from NES games with the (much, much) better graphics and (especially) sound of the SNES. It's akin to the PS2 compared to the PSX. The PSX was a breakthrough, but I don't want to play any of its games anymore because they are so badly dated.
 
"fixed" posts can be cute, anihawk, but editing ds praise into a sensible citizen's posts is nearly libellous. shame on you, sir. the nintendo ds already tops my internal "worst mainstream consoles ever" list, with the gamecube trailing closely behind. the "mainstream" is there specifically to disqualify those consoles that are actually worse than the ds and gamecube.
 
jarrod said:
Beat 'em Ups and Shooters pretty easily.

Can you give examples? Especially for shooters. Both systems were pretty weak for shooters, but I can't recall anything particularly good as far as shooters on the NES (please don't tell me Gradius either). And beat-em-ups? Examples there would be nice too, please.
 
great nes shmups - zanac, gun-nac, guardian legend tgl mode, gradius 2, life force, recca

great snes shmups - space megaforce, r type 3, parodius series, axelay, macross scrambled valkyrie

i think it's pretty even, honestly. neither console is nearly as strong as pc engine or genesis. which in turn are much weaker than playstation, which is in turn much weaker than saturn.
 
Cerebral Palsy said:
The Playstation better than the SNES, Genesis, and Dreamcast??? Yeah right.

Oh, yes. Easily, even if you base it on diversification of genres. Where's your Metal Gear Solid equivalent or PaRappa the Rapper equivalent on the SNES or Genesis? There weren't any. As for the DC, the genres already existed by that time, so developers could refine them.
 
Playstation definitley deserves to be high on the list, no doubt about it. It made gaming more mainstream. Unfortunatly it also took the definition shovelware to new heights.
 
I completely forgot about Zanac. RIP Compile. I'd still take Space Megaforce over Zanac though (can't help it, I'm a Gunhed/Blazing Lazers fan). How about beat-em-ups?
 
Geez that's a pretty bad list (imo)! o.o;

Personally my top 10 list would exclude these:

10. Nintendo 64 (Sucked)
6. Xbox (Sucks)
5. Playstation 2 (Letdown)
3. Super NES (Redundant due to GBA)
 
Grubdog said:
What a terrible list, GC should be first. That looks like a popularity list..

:lol :lol

I knew this thread would be entertaining. I said "Amir0x, you're about to go celebrate New Years Eve. Find a good thread at GAF and laugh!"

And thank you, Grubdog. Comedy Astatine.

P.S. I believe EGMs list factored in the influential factor. How influential were these products to the videogame market? I think the list more accurately reflects this question.
 
I agree that NES was an awesome system back then, but going back to play all those nostalgic memories now...many games have simply aged too much. There are exceptions though, like Punchout. I will probably never grow tired of that game. :)
But if I assume that the list is made according to how good the consoles were during their respective active time periods, the list is pretty accurate for me. GBA would be lower though, and Genesis a bit higher.
 
Top Bottom