"Soulless" consoles

[mbd30]

Which consoles do you consider to be "soulless", if any? Are there any older (pre-PS1) consoles that any of you consider "soulless" or was that the first?

[+LS650]

Anything that reads a disc.

[xg4bx]

i'd say the nes. it was just a big gray shoebox.

[godslabrat]

Which consoles do you consider to be "soulless", if any? Are there any older (pre-PS1) consoles that any of you consider "soulless" or was that the first?

 

I'm having trouble coming up with an objective (or even consistent) criteria for "soulless". The PS1 is obviously the first console I'll throw onto the list. Why? Lacking in first party support and no regard by its creators for previous generations of gaming. Possibly worst of all, its success was largely due to Sony's ridiculously lucky timing rather than any particular strength of the console itself-- yet the perception is that Sony went toe-to-toe against Sega and Nintendo at their best, and won.

 

I would also call the PS2 soulless, simply because it's not radically different from the PS1 in any of the above areas. The PS3 has me torn-- I hate it as a game console, but love it as a Home Theater box. The original X-Box I would call "soulless", due to its weak 1st-party lineup and MS' tactic of blatantly buying their way into an industry they were clueless about. I would NOT say the same about the 360... hardware issues aside, it's a great system both for the games and the social interactions on XBL.

 

Are there soulless systems in the pre-PS1 era? An argument could be made for the CD-i, I think.

[tz101]

Sega Master System. It was available as an alternative to NES, but the library was relatively boring, and the console labored in anonymity for many years. Nobody I knew had a Sega Master System. NES ruled.

[atarian63]

Xbox and xbox 360 for modern souless consoles. Just a mc console from a souless mega corp. What could be more without a soul than a Bill gates product?

 

3do for older consoles, and I hate to say it but jag is a bit that way ( I still like my jag though)

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

To me just the current gen (360/Wii/PS3) anything that is expected to be online as standard and no that does not include Dreamcast because that had loads of soul just being a Sega console as I expect a modern Sega console would also.

[Lord Thag]

These threads seem to pop up about once a year. It's a purely subjective thing, of course, as 'souless' really means that a particular system has no interest or fascination for you personally.

 

For me, most of the disk based stuff other than the Turbo Duo is just terrible, save for the current generation, which has a few truly outstanding games (Demon's Souls, Mass Effect, Halo, Oblivion etc).

 

I really dislike the n64 as well, though it has a handful of excellent games.

[CGQuarterly]

This thread is soulless. I really don't understand how someone can be a classic gaming enthusiast while having such disdain for certain consoles. That's just close-minded BS.

 

Chris

[Atari Joe]

I agree with Chris. And someone's personal fear, hatred and loathing of "corporate greed" and "evil profit" blinds some people to some really fantastic systems. (Let's not forget who owned Atari in it's heyday.) Ironically, so does the inverse. There were some superb underdog systems out there. I'd have to stand up for the Sega Master System and say that I knew a number of people who had them including myself and we enjoyed some great games! Including Shinobi, Out Run, After Burner, Space Harrier, Astro Boy, Alex Kidd, and the very best version of Ghostbusters! Plus it was different than what everyone else who came over would expect to see- a grey box that said Nintendo.

[zylon]

While the Master system had limited release in the US, it dominated Nintendo in the rest of the world. In fact, Nintendo had to port some SMS games to help with sales in Europe. SMS is still being produced in South America.

[Atari Joe]

I know. It was a pretty great system.

[zylon]

I don't feel any system could be classified as "souless". Every system is somebody somewhere's favorite.

[Atari Joe]

I don't feel any system could be classified as "souless". Every system is somebody somewhere's favorite.

 

 

Not Game.com That thing is a piece of $h*t everyone knows that!

[mbd30]

I agree with Chris and Atari_Joe.

 

[kool kitty89]

Which consoles do you consider to be "soulless", if any? Are there any older (pre-PS1) consoles that any of you consider "soulless" or was that the first?

 

I'm having trouble coming up with an objective (or even consistent) criteria for "soulless". The PS1 is obviously the first console I'll throw onto the list. Why? Lacking in first party support and no regard by its creators for previous generations of gaming. Possibly worst of all, its success was largely due to Sony's ridiculously lucky timing rather than any particular strength of the console itself-- yet the perception is that Sony went toe-to-toe against Sega and Nintendo at their best, and won.

 

I would also call the PS2 soulless, simply because it's not radically different from the PS1 in any of the above areas. The PS3 has me torn-- I hate it as a game console, but love it as a Home Theater box. The original X-Box I would call "soulless", due to its weak 1st-party lineup and MS' tactic of blatantly buying their way into an industry they were clueless about. I would NOT say the same about the 360... hardware issues aside, it's a great system both for the games and the social interactions on XBL.

 

Are there soulless systems in the pre-PS1 era? An argument could be made for the CD-i, I think.

 

I wouldn't consider the CD-i a console... It's a bit like calling the Nuon a console. (it was a medial player with some added games -though I think there was a more console oriented version as well)

The Laseractive was a console (and media player), the 3DO was a console (though promoted with multimedia capabilities as a primary feature), but I don't really think the CD-i was.

 

That's an interesting point with Sony and true that they got lucky with timing (or had actually been planning that, perhaps a bit of luck getting to learn from the successful techniques of competitors and avoiding pitfalls as 3DO ended up with -Sony did go with a hardware/software plan very similar to 3DO).

Even with Sega and Nintendo healthy and in the game (ie Nintendo not lagging almost 2 years behind), Sony still had resources to push around that they other 2 couldn't match and a platform optimized in ways the market hadn't really seen before (somewhat with 3DO). They totally saturated the market with advertising and then sold the hardware below cost (at least for a good portion of the console's life), such harsh tactics that the competition would have been hard pressed in the best of cases. (they also totally smothered Atari with any fleeting chance the Jaguar had of continued existence and 3DO for that matter, then there's the downfall of NEC with their rushed and misguided effort to combat Sony by dusting off an older design and rushing it to market as the PCFX -that was simply poor thinking on NEC's part as they had a very strong market share and a popular well-established CD based platform that would have facilitated enough time to actually design a directly competitive console with the kind of Resources NEC and Hudson had available -possibly use soem components of the PCFX as the CPU was probably OK, PCE compatibility would have been good had they implemented it, and the video decoder was very capable)

[yuppicide]

Anything without cartridges, and anything by Sega.

 

My friend thought he was cool by getting a SMS for Christmas when most people had NES. He couldn't borrow games from anynone. He always tried to make his system sound like it was better, oh so what you had Afterburner, but he knew. We had EVERYTHING else. I mean, who was over my house playing Super Mario Bros all the time.

Edited June 24, 2010 by yuppicide

[Shephda]

For me it would be the Sega CD. Very bad games, ever play Bug?

Now it was bleeding edge for it's day, but almost every game was a lame video sprinkled with bad gameing.

 

JMHO

[The_Laird]

This is not about consoles you hate or ones with bad games its about ones with no soul!

 

I will add my quote from the other thread that may have sparked this topic, for me the PS1 was the first, although I thought the 3DO was pretty souless but at least had some kind of legacy with EA and Trip Hawkins at the helm.

 

 

The PS1 has no soul at all.

 

When you play on an Atari you playing Atari games on an Atari machine. You feel part of legacy, part of the history, you are playing games you couldn't elsewhere and you are playing on a machine that unlike any other of its generation. Same can be said of Sega and Nintendo too (although I have never liked their games)

 

When you play on a Sony you play on a generic console, with generic games, no history and nothing that you couldn't really play elsewhere. It was the PS1 gen when gaming started to lose its soul, anything the PS1 could do a PC could do and this carried on with the PS2 and etc.

 

Wehen you played a Dreamcast or N64 at least you knew you could play games that couldn't be found elsewhere and never would be.

 

And for those ragging on the SMS above. If you had been anywhere in Europe and owned a NES people would have laughed at you! The SMS had Afterburner, Outrun, Mortal Kombat, Sonic, Shinobi, Zaxxon 3D, Space Harrier and the the NES had kiddy styled crap like Mario and Kirby.

[DracIsBack]

Sega Master System. It was available as an alternative to NES, but the library was relatively boring, and the console labored in anonymity for many years. Nobody I knew had a Sega Master System. NES ruled.

 

and anything by Sega.

 

Come here, while I slap you both!

Edited June 24, 2010 by DracIsBack

[+save2600]

Do any game systems have a soul? Can they get to heaven? If your pet can't, surely a manmade hunk of silicon, metal and plastic won't!

 

Intrinsic kidding aside, I think some are getting bent out of shape due to the use of the word 'soul' contextually. Maybe what should be asked is: "what systems seem to have the most amount of personality, love and care thrown into them"? You know... like all the little "feelies" that came along with some of the systems and their games. Atari and Sega would win hands down for me. Think about the Master System days. The boxes they came in, the poster advertising other games and on the flipside, artwork of the game you just bought. Game companies, such as Atari, that had interactive contests and promotions that rank too. To me, these kinds of systems seem to have the least amount of "soul" put into them:

 

Just about any of those generic Pong based systems.

 

Odyssey 2

 

Fairchild/Channel F/Emerson Arcadia (they all seem the same)

 

Bally Professional Arcade (excellent example as they couldn't/wouldn't secure their own arcade titles)

 

Coleco Gemini

 

Philips CD-i to an extent, although they really tried to keep that thing alive w/ diverse titles, MPEG movies and such

 

3DO - the XBox of the time. Had most of their titles not also been cross platform and the system's price cut in half - I might feel differently about it.

 

TG-16 to an extent. Hard to explain, but the gameplay has a "feel" to it that's rather one-dimensional or "flat". Didn't help that NEC/Hudson of America totally botched the marketing of this system of here. Could have been a real NES/Genny killer - but nope. The greatest games from the PC Engine never made its way here and a majority of the CD based titles sucked.

 

All Sony game systems, although I'd give more props to the PS1 than the latter two, just for its early library

 

Neo*Geo CD - Idiots. Now we have to wait forever for 64+megabit games to load. Yawn.

 

Amiga CD32 (for the same reason as Neo*Geo's CD: cheap, quick & lazy ports with nothing new)

 

Nintendo Wii - some sterility going on here, might be the color and design of the system & the little characters with perma-grins pasted on

 

XBox 360 - just an incredibly defective generic PeeCee to me.

 

...and I partly agree with the comment made about the Jaguar. Way too many titles seemed to be thrown together haphazardly. I wouldn't call the system completely "soulless" however. The Jaguar itself (concept & design) has a TON of soul. It's just that much of its software undermined the potential of the system. Mid 90's were strange and volatile times for both Atari and the gaming industry. I really, really wish Atari (and Commodore for that matter) had been in better hands back then.

 

Most all Atari, Sega and Nintendo systems seem to have plenty of soul to go around though. To me, custom chipsets, unique case designs and unique/original games are really what constitutes a machines soul factor. The way they were promoted too back then. The boxes of the systems themselves were more interesting and compelling. Hardware specs and exclusivity of titles gave you something to talk about or maybe be "proud" of. Today, it seems as if gaming/computing technology is at a standstill and in some cases, it's going backwards (especially the efficiency of modern webpages/internet languages). But no matter what modern game system we're talking about today, their output all looks and sounds exactly the same to me. These are incredibly watered down and generic/mediocre times we're living in, so I guess it stands to reason just about ALL of our media would be made to mirror the generation(s) that are creating them. Only natural now that gaming and computing alike are mainstream and that's the real problem.

Edited June 24, 2010 by save2600

[zombiecraig]

This thread is soulless. I really don't understand how someone can be a classic gaming enthusiast while having such disdain for certain consoles. That's just close-minded BS.

 

Chris

 

 

Agreed. While there are systems that I am not all that jazzed up about owning or playing (mostly due to them just not having that warm, fuzzy, nostalgic feeling), this idea is ridiculous.

 

Consoles by Sony and Microsoft are soulless because they were made by mega-corporations. But consoles made by Nintendo have souls, because Nintendo is not a mega-corporation. Huh? Last time I checked, Nintendo was still doing pretty well for themselves.

 

I guess I can understand seemingly everyone getting all gooey over Sega. Especially, the cute and cuddley Dreamcast. The little system that couldn't survive the terrible onslaught from the hell demons Sony and Microsoft. Ugh, it's called business, get over it.

 

It's like me with Planters Cheez Balls. I used to enjoy them, but they are no longer in production.

 

DAMN YOU, CHEETOS! DAMN YOU!

[+LS650]

I really don't understand how someone can be a classic gaming enthusiast while having such disdain for ...

Relax - they're just personal opinions. You certainly don't have to agree if you don't want to!

[dooglehead]

Every console made after 1984.

[mbd30]

And for those ragging on the SMS above. If you had been anywhere in Europe and owned a NES people would have laughed at you! The SMS had Afterburner, Outrun, Mortal Kombat, Sonic, Shinobi, Zaxxon 3D, Space Harrier and the the NES had kiddy styled crap like Mario and Kirby.

 

"After Burner" and "Shinobi" were on the NES thanks to Tengen. "Space Harrier" was ported to the NES as well. Maybe they weren't the best ports, but they were playable on the NES!

 

And "Ninja Gaiden", "Contra", "Castlevania", "Metroid", etc. "kiddy styled crap"? I also like how Mario is supposed to be kiddy crap but Sonic is not.