Your Personal Least-favourite consoles

[Croooow!]

I've found that I only really have fun playing Atari 2600 when its with someone else. Otherwise most of the games can't hold my interest enough to warrant me spending my time playing it.

[Hatta]

You do have to be a bit self-motivating to enjoy Atari games, but that doesn't mean they aren't good games. I really enjoy the 2600, and I never owned one until about 1998 or so. It's all about the enjoyment that comes from learning a skill, rather than that that comes from exploring a world or hearing a story.

[Jrecee]

Just like all of us have at least a few games we remember fondly only out of nostalgia, I think the Atari 2600 is appealing to those who have memories of it. The games are just so basic that there's very little that's appealing to most people, unless you have another connection to it. Nes and later systems had deeper games, and a lot of the underlying concepts that were developed for those games are still a part of games today. Like anything, it gets better as people learn what works and what doesn't.

[Hatta]

I think the Atari 2600 is appealing to those who have memories of it.

I really enjoy the 2600, and I never owned one until about 1998 or so.

You don't have to be from the 70s to enjoy the Atari 2600 any more than you have to be from the 1700s to enjoy Mozart.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

Name me three decent games for the 3D0.

Need For Speed. Street Fighter 2. Megarace. Wolfenstein.

There's 4 for your enjoyment.

(It really isn't a good console though, not worth owning, but it did have SOME good games...)

[BoringSupreez]

Name me three decent games for the 3D0.

Need For Speed. Street Fighter 2. Megarace. Wolfenstein.

There's 4 for your enjoyment.

(It really isn't a good console though, not worth owning, but it did have SOME good games...)

Wolfenstein was better on PC, and everyone has a powerful enough PC to run it now, so it's not worth buying, except as a collectors piece. I don't know how the other three games stack up against the other versions.

[EvilRyu2099]

Wolfenstein was better on PC, and everyone has a powerful enough PC to run it now, so it's not worth buying, except as a collectors piece. I don't know how the other three games stack up against the other versions.

Well Super Street Fighter II Turbo for the 3DO was probably one of the best ports at the time... Doom had kickass music also, but the framerate issues were god awful.. Jaguar's Doom port was probably the best on console at the time, but it didn't include in game music.. Other than that is was on par with PC..

[Gunstar Green]

I think the Atari 2600 is appealing to those who have memories of it.

I really enjoy the 2600, and I never owned one until about 1998 or so.

You don't have to be from the 70s to enjoy the Atari 2600 any more than you have to be from the 1700s to enjoy Mozart.

Yeah but the difference here is Mozart's music already had thousands of years of development and discovery behind it in order to have the conventions and the instruments needed for it to exist. During the time of the 2600 games were something entirely new. Atari 2600 is more akin to banging sticks on a cave wall than it is to Mozart.

No, you don't need to be from the 1970's to enjoy it but it's definitely not something for everyone. I had one when I was a kid even and while I have some fond memories of it the last time I tried to play it before I got rid of it I ended up being disappointed because my nostalgia remembered it being a lot better than it actually was. That's not to say some of the games weren't fun. I still really love Vanguard.

[Hatta]

You know, with all the flash mini-games, and cell phone games that people play these days I don't really see why they wouldn't enjoy 2600 games. The games are equally simplistic. 2600 games just have worse graphics, but better controls. But I guess only casual gamers play mini-games, and only gaming nerds care about controls.

[martyg]

Nes and later systems had deeper games, and a lot of the underlying concepts that were developed for those games are still a part of games today. Like anything, it gets better as people learn what works and what doesn't.

I'd be interested for you to elaborate what you think was developed for the NES vs. what actually existed previously. Also, what concepts and mechanics are you aware of that were developed via Atari (in coin and consoles) that are still with us today as well.

Marty