Is It Me, or Does the Nintendo 64 SUCK?!

Your concept of the N64's casual appeal is just utterly, confusingly bizarre. It's some alternate dimension where the system is a different one from the one it is, and where it sold to a different audience from the one it did in reality. And you keep ignoring some of my best evidence of that. What you're saying sounds like anti-Nintendo propaganda from the '90s, not what actually happened at the time, pretty much. I guess I have to say it again...

Goldeneye sold 8 million copies on the N64. That puts it tied for seventh in sales for that generation, according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_games Only Mario 64, Mario Kart 64, Gran Turismo 1 and 2, and Final Fantasy VII and VIII beat Goldeneye in worldwide sales, though Tomb Raider II also ties it at 8 million. Goldeneye sol,d extremely, extremely well, and helped more than anything else to push the N64 to a significant older, more casual gaming audience. Between Goldeneye and Turok, the N64 was the clear choice for the console FPS fan. Thenewguy and I have also listed numerous N64 games for older audiences, as well. You can't just keep ignoring all of this and claiming that the system was only for kids and only sold to children and Nintendo fans, which is false and was never true.

Did even more casual gamers overall buy Playstations? Yeah. But, in North America, did a lot of them get N64s? Absolutely. Elsewhere, no. But in North America, most certainly yes.

Yes, the "Nintendo is kiddy" thing never went away -- it was something Playstation fans used against the N64, as anti-Nintendo people have tried every generation since the SNES -- but Nintendo had a solid, significant older gamer userbase with the N64. It then lost that to Microsoft, and neither the GC or Wii has been aimed at that audience at all, but the N64 did have it.


Also, how do you know what RS2 does that BfN doesn't when you haven't played BfN? Yes, the GC games do do some things the N64 ones don't, but you haven't played it... it's not exactly the same as RS1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

Your concept of the N64's casual appeal is just utterly, confusingly bizarre. It's some alternate dimension where the system is a different one from the one it is, and where it sold to a different audience from the one it did in reality. And you keep ignoring some of my best evidence of that. What you're saying sounds like anti-Nintendo propaganda from the '90s, not what actually happened at the time, pretty much. I guess I have to say it again...

Goldeneye sold 8 million copies on the N64. That puts it tied for seventh in sales for that generation, according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_selling_video_games Only Mario 64, Mario Kart 64, Gran Turismo 1 and 2, and Final Fantasy VII and VIII beat Goldeneye in worldwide sales, though Tomb Raider II also ties it at 8 million. Goldeneye sol,d extremely, extremely well, and helped more than anything else to push the N64 to a significant older, more casual gaming audience. Between Goldeneye and Turok, the N64 was the clear choice for the console FPS fan. Thenewguy and I have also listed numerous N64 games for older audiences, as well. You can't just keep ignoring all of this and claiming that the system was only for kids and only sold to children and Nintendo fans, which is false and was never true.

Did even more casual gamers overall buy Playstations? Yeah. But, in North America, did a lot of them get N64s? Absolutely. Elsewhere, no. But in North America, most certainly yes.

Yes, the "Nintendo is kiddy" thing never went away -- it was something Playstation fans used against the N64, as anti-Nintendo people have tried every generation since the SNES -- but Nintendo had a solid, significant older gamer userbase with the N64. It then lost that to Microsoft, and neither the GC or Wii has been aimed at that audience at all, but the N64 did have it.


Also, how do you know what RS2 does that BfN doesn't when you haven't played BfN? Yes, the GC games do do some things the N64 ones don't, but you haven't played it... it's not exactly the same as RS1.

---

You saw the gaming world from the perspective of a 13 year old boy in 1997. I have no doubt that amongst your gaming friends, Goldeneye was unbelievable and very popular, as it should be. Final Fantasy VII was probably seen in the same way, amongst the gaming groups, but outside of that area, who knew what those were?

Yeah, Sony advertised Final Fantasy VII, but the majority of their commercials in North America were for sports titles. They grabbed that area of the gaming segment and held onto it until the 360 came out. This isn't some sort of bashing on the N64, or Nintendo, it's fact. You can choose to ignore what has happened to Nintendo, going from the leading console marketer, to 3rd place two generations later, but it has to do with perception. Sony's success in North America had a lot to do with the perception that it was a cool gaming system for the average male. And their ads pushed that idea for nearly a decade.

The Playstation was not my favorite console, the PS2 wasn't either, but Sony does what they do best, promote electronic goods. And what does every male in the 20-35 age range like to buy? Cool electonic items that they can play with. They captured the key 3rd party developers, they captured the minds of consumers and they flourished because of it. Nintendo, on the other hand, did what they do best, make great games that they hope will be enough to sway the consumers. And unfortuneatly, they earned a stereotype that they will have a hard time shaking, even if they put a picture of Mario's severed hand on every Wii U console box, with some Master Chief looking dude holding a rifle.

Here's an interesting article about the PS2 and market perception.

http://www.dfcint.com/game_article/myths.html

Quote:

---

A case study of Nintendo and Sega shows what could go wrong for the PlayStation 2. The history of the Nintendo 64 provides an example of how the PlayStation 2 could do well, but not dominate the market. Of course, the original PlayStation was a very successful system and PlayStation software outsold Nintendo 64 software by a margin of about 2 to 1 in 1998 and 1999. However, many people forget how tight the race between the PlayStation and Nintendo 64 originally was. The Nintendo 64 launch was extremely successful, but the system eventually suffered from a small software library, limited third party support and the high price of cartridge based media.

The Nintendo 64 is also a perfect example of how one "killer application" can cause a major market shift. The PlayStation had a much broader product library at more attractive prices, but the Nintendo 64 still did relatively well. With the Nintendo Dolphin, the playing field will be more equal as Nintendo will no longer have to rely on cartridge based media. There are still many questions about Nintendo’s future. Will Nintendo learn from its mistakes with the Nintendo 64? Is Nintendo stuck in the rut of being simply a toy for kids? Can the Pokemon craze continue? Will Nintendo see their market share further erode over time as more companies target the Nintendo audience? Can Nintendo leverage its considerable talents into the broader interactive entertainment space? Is the Dolphin being released to market too late? Despite all the questions, the history of the Nintendo 64 may actually indicate that Nintendo, not Sony is the favorite to dominate the 128-bit market.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

Nintendo had a solid, significant older gamer userbase with the N64. It then lost that to Microsoft, and neither the GC or Wii has been aimed at that audience at all

---

Not aimed at that audience at all? What was Metroid Prime then? And Eternal Darkness?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

You saw the gaming world from the perspective of a 13 year old boy in 1997. I have no doubt that amongst your gaming friends, Goldeneye was unbelievable and very popular, as it should be. Final Fantasy VII was probably seen in the same way, amongst the gaming groups, but outside of that area, who knew what those were?

---

This is wrong. First, I was 15 in 1997, not 13 (at that age that makes a difference...). Second, I was never an FPS fan, and didn't care too much about Goldeneye myself. I knew one person who owned the game, but I'm mostly saying that in retrospect, looking back at history and seeing what happened. And that's what happened. What do I think of Goldeneye? I think it's somewhat overrated by many people, who mention it over and over as one of the only good games on the N64... that's just not true, plenty of other games are better. So are many PC FPSes from the '90s, and through the '90s, I was a PC gamer first, so I would have noticed that kind of thing; even if I didn't play FPSes too often until the late '90s, I subscribed to PC Gamer for over 4 years... But anyway, there's no question Goldeneye made one of the biggest impacts of any game that generation, right up there with the other games on that short list.

Beyond that, you're basically saying that casual gamers who bought a console and like two games and knew nothing about gaming mostly had Playstations, yes? I'm sure many did, but some certainly had N64s, with Goldeneye, Madden, and Tony Hawk or something. "Play it Loud", Goldeneye, and the significant percentage of Western-developed titles for its era (thanks to its success in the US, the N64 got a good number of N64-first Western titles, something the GC never got) all helped sell the N64 to a more older-gamer audience than most Nintendo consoles have hit, I believe. I mean, the GC certainly didn't hit that age group as well, and the Wii obviously didn't, and in the NES and SNES that agegroup was smaller than it later became (particularly true for the NES).

Of course Nintendo always also aimed at the younger audience, and with great success, but that wasn't the only audience the N64 succeeded with... and while Sony did have the more casual-popular system, sure, Nintendo was competitive for a few years in that market, even if ultimately they lost it thanks to things like higher game prices, no piracy, FFVII, etc.

Quote:

---

Yeah, Sony advertised Final Fantasy VII, but the majority of their commercials in North America were for sports titles. They grabbed that area of the gaming segment and held onto it until the 360 came out. This isn't some sort of bashing on the N64, or Nintendo, it's fact. You can choose to ignore what has happened to Nintendo, going from the leading console marketer, to 3rd place two generations later, but it has to do with perception. Sony's success in North America had a lot to do with the perception that it was a cool gaming system for the average male. And their ads pushed that idea for nearly a decade.

---

As I said above, that generation, many casual sports fans owned Playstations, sure. And many casual FPS fans owned N64s. FPSes are absolutely a casual-friendly genre... The N64 was also a popular console with the male audience, it just was. Your denials don't match up with reality. (Oh, and the N64, as with most Nintendo consoles, wasn't the most popular sports game console, sure, but it did have a lot of sports games. I'm sure some of them sold. Nintendo even made some realistic sports games that gen, including two baseball games and two basketball games...)

Quote:

---

The Playstation was not my favorite console, the PS2 wasn't either, but Sony does what they do best, promote electronic goods. And what does every male in the 20-35 age range like to buy? Cool electonic items that they can play with. They captured the key 3rd party developers, they captured the minds of consumers and they flourished because of it. Nintendo, on the other hand, did what they do best, make great games that they hope will be enough to sway the consumers. And unfortuneatly, they earned a stereotype that they will have a hard time shaking, even if they put a picture of Mario's severed hand on every Wii U console box, with some Master Chief looking dude holding a rifle.

---

The N64 was actually quite competitive with the PS1 from 1996-1999. After that it fell off pretty fast, but for a while, it was close. Of course ultimately the PS1 ended up with twice the number of sales in North America that the N64 had, but that mostly happened because the PS1 sold for 3-4 more years than the N64 did, and that the N64 had faded a good year before that. Look at the N64's peak versus the Playstation, and it's closer than you suggest.

I mean, much of what you say there did happen (Sony did win with most developers, certainly), apart from Nintendo somehow earning its "kiddy" image that generation of course (that happened on the SNES, not the N64, which is an important difference. Of course as you say has never entirely gone away, despite, or because of, depending on the situation, Nintendo's various efforts, but that wasn't something new that generation.), but you underrate how successful the N64 was by a good margin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

It's an example. The car models are fine, the track side detail could be better, but it's still not bad compared to the often bland scenary a lot of racing games have.

---

The car models are not fine. I have the PC and Saturn versions of that game, those have to be some of the ugliest car models I've seen on the Saturn... and seriously, as far as gameplay goes, NFS3 and NFS4 just crush the first game. Again, why do you only care about the first one?

Quote:

---

I've rented a lot of N64 games, along with the Playstation and Saturn. I lived right next door to a Blockbuster Superstore that rented not only games, but systems like the Jag and 3DO.

---

So, you know that your statement in that last post (about the N64 not having much apart from what you mentioned there for third party N64-focused stuff) was wrong, then?

Quote:

---

By the time that game came out, I was already knee deep in Dreamcast. It's one of those games I plan on getting for the system, but never get around to it. I've heard good things about it.

---

There was a PC version of that one too, though I have it only for N64. Apart from the graphics, the biggest addition is probably that BfN has ground vehicles, and a bunch of ground missions. Some people don't like that, but I thought they worked fine.

Quote:

---

First off, it's in Dolby Pro-logic 2 surround, which makes the experience all the better. The battles on Hoth, Cloud City, Battle of Endor and the Deathstar are just way beyond what the N64 game did.

---

I've never had any kind of stereo system attached to a television, so I've never had anything other than intellectual curiosity in what console games support beyond stereo sound... but as for the rest, I commented in my last post about how sketchy it is to say that it does stuff the N64 games couldn't, when you haven't played the second N64 game. Again, yes, they do some things the N64 games couldn't, but BfN does do more than RS1 did, in some respects... sure, it doesn't have everything the GC games do, of course, but it expands on RS1.

Quote:

---

Some of my favorite games are on the Saturn, but there's also quite a bit that I like on the Playstation, in just about every genre.

Colony Wars
Warhawk
Gran Turismo 2 (Didn't really like the 1st)
Parappa the Rapper
Vandal Hearts
Lunar 1&2
Omega Boost
Front Mission 3
Final Fantasy VII
Wipeout 3
Thunder Force V
Castlevania: Symphony of the Night
R4 Ridge Racer Type 4 ( I didn't like the previous games)
Xenogears
Fear Effect
Metal Slug X
Final Fantasy Tactics
Strikers 1945
Einhander
Destruction Derby
Final Fantasy Origins
Need for Speed II
Panzer General (It's no Iron Storm, but still fun)
R-Types
Silent Hill
Vangaurd Bandits
NFL Gameday (the first one)
Wild Arms
Wild 9
Metal Gear Solid

There's more, that I'm not even going to bother listing, but I'm getting Alundra in the mail soon.

---

I could make a list of PS1 games I like -- and there are plenty, I like things like shmups and fighting games -- but I don't think a list here would have much of a point... I'll just agree that sure, there are plenty of PS1 games I like. It's the system, the controller, and the graphics (the 3d ones particularly) that I don't like.

Quote:

---

Consoles were still viewed as kids toys, but Sega broke that barrier with thier SEGA screams campaign and the popularity of the console's sports titles. Nintendo tried to counter it with "Play it Loud", but it was the late push of solid software and the fading of Sega that enabled the SNES to endure. Sony stepped in (in place of the nearly forgotten Sega) with their sports centric console (in North America) that appealed to late teens and early 20's gamers. Even their mascot, Crash, was more of an anti-mascot in their ads against Nintendo. So, when I say the N64 cemented Nintendo's position as the console for kids, no amount of percieved mature titles could save it from that label amongst the casual gamer (young men ages 15-25) that looked towards the Playstation for their casual sports titles.

---

I honestly think that it was the "Gamecube = purple lunchbox" and MS entering gaming thing that really sealed Nintendo's fate as "Nintendo = kiddy". Sure, teh GC ended up having mature games, but that start was basically proving every thing Nintendo bashers had ever said... at least with the N64, Nintendo could credibly defend against that stuff and say what I am, no, we have marketing and popular games for all audiences. But between Microsoft and the purple lunchbox, that didn't survive to the next generation.

Quote:

---

When I played games with my casual gaming buddies, it was Madden on the Genesis, Need for Speed and Pebble Beach Golf on the Saturn, and Madden, NFL Gameday and NHL Hockey on the Playstation. I had one friend that enjoyed Pilot Wings and Waverace on the N64, and a girl I was dating that wanted to play Super Mario 64, because she enjoyed playing it while babysitting her nephew.

---

Most casual gamers that gen wouldn't have even known what the Saturn WAS... I didn't know anyone who owned one, certainly. Most of my friends or relatives who I played games with (not too many people, I never had a lot of friends, but the ones I had then) had N64s (and computers, usually), or N64s and Playstations, except for one who didn't own any consoles and only played PC games. But of course personal experiences only mean so much.

Quote:

---

You're turning your nose to a great racing game, probably because it has Sony's name attached to it. Even if you don't like the simulation part, it has a great arcade mode.

---

If I believe GT was great in any way, I'd have bought one of them years ago. I'm not missing anything I'd enjoy playing, I think. I've played it at least once, sometime, and I know that's not much of a sample, but realistic driving games like that have always been the kinds of racing games I have the least interest in. And "there's also an arcade mode"? Hah, as if the arcade mode in a sim, or the sim mode in an arcade racer, is ever too relevant. The tracks are sure to be the same boring realistic racing tracks, for one thing...

Quote:

---

As I said above, the SNES was never seen as cool gaming console to own for casual male gamers. Outside of the gaming circles, those people probably didn't care or notice Mortal Kombat.

---

What kind of mythical "casual male gamer" could call themselves a gamer but didn't know Mortal Kombat? Someone who only played sports games and absolutely nothing else? Sure, a majority of those people mostly had Genesises, I think... but even the most casual gamers usually play a few things other than sports games. This gen it's FPSes, that era it'd probably be Mortal Kombat and Sonic. Or, for the SNES, Donkey Kong Country and Street Fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_factor

Not aimed at that audience at all? What was Metroid Prime then? And Eternal Darkness?

---

MP and ED? Those were exceptionally good but sadly failed (as far as mass-market sales go) attempts to make back some of the ground they lost to Microsoft and the "purple lunchbox" fiasco, that's what they were. The same goes for the three Resident Evil games, though I wouldn't call those "exceptionally good" because I don't like that series as much as MP or ED.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

MP and ED? Those were exceptionally good but sadly failed (as far as mass-market sales go) attempts to make back some of the ground they lost to Microsoft and the "purple lunchbox" fiasco, that's what they were. The same goes for the three Resident Evil games, though I wouldn't call those "exceptionally good" because I don't like that series as much as MP or ED.

---

They may not have done as well, but they were still aimed at that audience. I'm not really sure what sales have to do with being adult or not.

Just by way of demonstrating how wildly different people's experiences can be:

During the 32-bit years I was in college. Among my college friends (and family members) who were into gaming, I knew absolutely no one who owned a PlayStation, or even expressed interest in getting one. Fifth-gen console ownership in my circle was about 90% N64, and 10% Sega Saturn...plus a bunch of PC gamers, a handful of Mac gamers, and a surprising number of people who weren't really interested in anything past the SNES (seriously, that was the case even then).

Statistical anomaly? Possibly. But it also had to do with price, the quirks of regional distribution, and especially, brand loyalty. It took a while before it was clear that PlayStation was going to be a complete success, and meanwhile people were willing to wait for the rumored next-gen Nintendo system. Why? Because they knew Nintendo, knew their track record, and had a sense of what to expect: continuity with the past decade of gaming experiences.

BTW I sort of know what gamevet's getting at with the "casual male gamer", at least as personified by some of the jocks and rednecks I knew in high school who did seem more likely to own a Genesis than an SNES...but I think it relates more to the fact that the Genesis was cheaper, and had better sports games, than to anything else. The only time that the SNES was at any real risk of a "kiddie" image was during the Mortal Kombat fiasco, which was genuinely damaging but also short-lived.

No one I knew in the early 1990s gave a shit about which system you owned, and how that affected your personal image; it was a non-issue, particularly because both consoles were so obviously successful that to claim otherwise would have been absurd. It was the games that were cool or uncool, not the console.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

This is wrong. First, I was 15 in 1997, not 13 (at that age that makes a difference...).

---

Well in May of 1997 you were 14, not 15. That is unless you didn't put the right date in you bio here.

Quote:

---

Beyond that, you're basically saying that casual gamers who bought a console and like two games and knew nothing about gaming mostly had Playstations, yes? I'm sure many did, but some certainly had N64s, with Goldeneye, Madden, and Tony Hawk or something. "Play it Loud", Goldeneye, and the significant percentage of Western-developed titles for its era (thanks to its success in the US, the N64 got a good number of N64-first Western titles, something the GC never got) all helped sell the N64 to a more older-gamer audience than most Nintendo consoles have hit, I believe. I mean, the GC certainly didn't hit that age group as well, and the Wii obviously didn't, and in the NES and SNES that agegroup was smaller than it later became (particularly true for the NES).

---

I'm saying casual gamers really don't play a lot of games, or follow the scene. Hell, most of them don't (seem)even like to talk about videogames.

Quote:

---

Of course Nintendo always also aimed at the younger audience, and with great success, but that wasn't the only audience the N64 succeeded with... and while Sony did have the more casual-popular system, sure, Nintendo was competitive for a few years in that market, even if ultimately they lost it thanks to things like higher game prices, no piracy, FFVII, etc.

---

Higher cart prices and a poorer selection of games.

Quote:

---

As I said above, that generation, many casual sports fans owned Playstations, sure. And many casual FPS fans owned N64s. FPSes are absolutely a casual-friendly genre... The N64 was also a popular console with the male audience, it just was. Your denials don't match up with reality. (Oh, and the N64, as with most Nintendo consoles, wasn't the most popular sports game console, sure, but it did have a lot of sports games. I'm sure some of them sold. Nintendo even made some realistic sports games that gen, including two baseball games and two basketball games...)

---

Yes, Tony Hawk and Madden sold quite well on the N64.

Quote:

---

The N64 was actually quite competitive with the PS1 from 1996-1999. After that it fell off pretty fast, but for a while, it was close. Of course ultimately the PS1 ended up with twice the number of sales in North America that the N64 had, but that mostly happened because the PS1 sold for 3-4 more years than the N64 did, and that the N64 had faded a good year before that. Look at the N64's peak versus the Playstation, and it's closer than you suggest.

---

I saw how retail supported both. I remember when Best Buy started to reduce the inventory to make more space for systems like the Dreamcast. The N64 still had games that were selling in the top 10 as well, but I never got the perception that N64 was a cool system to own, outside of gaming circles.

Quote:

---

I mean, much of what you say there did happen (Sony did win with most developers, certainly), apart from Nintendo somehow earning its "kiddy" image that generation of course (that happened on the SNES, not the N64, which is an important difference. Of course as you say has never entirely gone away, despite, or because of, depending on the situation, Nintendo's various efforts, but that wasn't something new that generation.), but you underrate how successful the N64 was by a good margin.

---

I never said it wasn't succesful. It had a lot of success right out of the gates and that was the momentum that kept it competetive up until 1999. I'd say a good part of the success had to do with Mario, and the momentum that was created by the SNES before it's launch. The Gamecube should have had simular success right out of the gate, but obviously the N64's slow decline and image didn't help it.

Quote:

---

The car models are not fine. I have the PC and Saturn versions of that game, those have to be some of the ugliest car models I've seen on the Saturn... and seriously, as far as gameplay goes, NFS3 and NFS4 just crush the first game. Again, why do you only care about the first one?

---

All I said was the first Need for Speed would have sold far better than most of those very average racers on the N64. You got fixated on that and ran with it.

Quote:

---

So, you know that your statement in that last post (about the N64 not having much apart from what you mentioned there for third party N64-focused stuff) was wrong, then?

---

No, I was grown man with my own money. I didn't care for most of the software available for the N64. I mean, I even played Lode Runner 64. Have you?

Quote:

---

I've never had any kind of stereo system attached to a television, so I've never had anything other than intellectual curiosity in what console games support beyond stereo sound... but as for the rest, I commented in my last post about how sketchy it is to say that it does stuff the N64 games couldn't, when you haven't played the second N64 game. Again, yes, they do some things the N64 games couldn't, but BfN does do more than RS1 did, in some respects... sure, it doesn't have everything the GC games do, of course, but it expands on RS1.

---

It makes a big difference in the whole experience. The sounds of Tie-Fighters flying around you (Even though no one can hear you scream in space) makes the game feel like you watching a Star Wars film in the theater. I didn't get that same feeling with the stereo sound of Rogue Squadron.

Quote:

---

I could make a list of PS1 games I like -- and there are plenty, I like things like shmups and fighting games -- but I don't think a list here would have much of a point... I'll just agree that sure, there are plenty of PS1 games I like. It's the system, the controller, and the graphics (the 3d ones particularly) that I don't like.

---

You made judgement on that console before you ever touched its controller, it's pretty obvious. Just by saying that Gran Turismo 2 wasn't good and then holding mediocre N64 racing games on a pedestal, you've proven that.

Quote:

---

I honestly think that it was the "Gamecube = purple lunchbox" and MS entering gaming thing that really sealed Nintendo's fate as "Nintendo = kiddy". Sure, teh GC ended up having mature games, but that start was basically proving every thing Nintendo bashers had ever said... at least with the N64, Nintendo could credibly defend against that stuff and say what I am, no, we have marketing and popular games for all audiences. But between Microsoft and the purple lunchbox, that didn't survive to the next generation.

---

The N64 had a Fisher Price looking controller. You can't refute that. It was not only the Xbox that led to the failure of the GC, but it was a part of it.

My launch GC is Onyx along with the GB player. I believe NOA tried to replace that purple box early on.

Quote:

---

If I believe GT was great in any way, I'd have bought one of them years ago. I'm not missing anything I'd enjoy playing, I think. I've played it at least once, sometime, and I know that's not much of a sample, but realistic driving games like that have always been the kinds of racing games I have the least interest in. And "there's also an arcade mode"? Hah, as if the arcade mode in a sim, or the sim mode in an arcade racer, is ever too relevant. The tracks are sure to be the same boring realistic racing tracks, for one thing...

---

Its 27 tracks based on real racing circuits. It's miles better than any racer you can name on the N64. Hands down, no argument.

Quote:

---

What kind of mythical "casual male gamer" could call themselves a gamer but didn't know Mortal Kombat? Someone who only played sports games and absolutely nothing else? Sure, a majority of those people mostly had Genesises, I think... but even the most casual gamers usually play a few things other than sports games. This gen it's FPSes, that era it'd probably be Mortal Kombat and Sonic. Or, for the SNES, Donkey Kong Country and Street Fighter.

---

You're really over estimating the casual male gamer. They don't follow the gaming scene at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

First, I was 15 in 1997, not 13 (at that age that makes a difference...).

---

Actually I think Gamevet is at the other extreme, I have a suspicion that he was well and trully out of the average videogaming bracket when the N64 came out, most gamers back then were pre teen to young adult, Gamevet may well have been in his mid 30s by that stage so its not surprising that he was completely out of touch with what was going on at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Black Falcon

Seriously, as far as gameplay goes, NFS3 and NFS4 just crush the first game. Again, why do you only care about the first one?

---

I think its quite obvious to be honest, he prefers the first one, because its the only one which was ported to Saturn, and because after Sega's offerings its one of the only good arcade racers on the entire system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thenewguy

Actually I think Gamevet is at the other extreme, I have a suspicion that he was well and trully out of the average videogaming bracket when the N64 came out, most gamers back then were pre teen to young adult, Gamevet may well have been in his mid 30s by that stage so its not surprising that he was completely out of touch with what was going on at the time.

---

I was 27 when the N64 came out. Most of my friends were in their early 20's as well.

During that time, I installed network connections in college dorms for schools like Iowa State and the University of North Texas. I also did network connections in homes. I usually found that the families with kids between the ages of 6-16 had N64s, while in the dorms it was predominantly Playstation and later Xbox and PS2. I was actually shocked, when I'd seen a GameCube in the dorm of a football player at UNT.

I've said it before, as well as others have, that you'll find that the biggest supporters of the N64, generally fit in the age range I've described. Those gamers that were in their early teens during that time, enjoyed the console more and are more passionate about it's games and hardware. I believe we're seeing the same thing in this very thread.

Quote:

---

I think its quite obvious to be honest, he prefers the first one, because its the only one which was ported to Saturn, and because after Sega's offerings its one of the only good arcade racers on the entire system.

---

I've already explained that. I actually preferred NFS II on the Playstation, but got burned out on the franchise by the 3rd title. I gave him NFS as an example and he ran with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

I've said it before, as well as others have, that you'll find that the biggest supporters of the N64, generally fit in the age range I've described. Those gamers that were in their early teens during that time, enjoyed the console more and are more passionate about it's games and hardware. I believe we're seeing the same thing in this very thread.

---

Yeah, there definitely seems to be a correlation. I would be interested in seeing how many people that owned all three major consoles that gen would pick the N64 as #1. I'm guessing it would be a small percentage.

I owned all three consoles of that Generation and I turned 7 in 1995. So here's my view of that Generation:

Up until late 1996 early 1997 I didn't know a single person who really cared about the next gen systems. Most of us were content with our Genesis and SNES systems. I got a Saturn in late 1996. In 1997 is when the N64 and PS1 really seemed to take off and be noticable. I remember I had friends with Saturns and we enjoyed the system, but it was really difficult to get games for it. I remember Toys R Us being the only place to consistently find Saturn games as well as a few shops at malls. WalMart, Target, and other department stores still had their Video Game sections packed full of Genesis and SNES games. It wasn't until 1997 that I remember seeing that shelf space begin to fill with more PS1 and N64 titles.

The PS1 I got in 1998 for Christmas from my Cousins. I remember I didn't really care about the thing as all the games I tried on it I hated. It wasn't until I tried Final Fantasy 8 and Metal Gear Solid that I came to enjoy the system. In fact, my PS1 collection pretty much consists of Final Fantasy 7, Final Fantasy 8, Star Ocean Second Story, Metal Gear Solid, and Resident Evil 2. N64 I remember having a blast playing with friends for Multiplayer games. However I don't really remember playing many Third Party games that much. I remember a friend had Quake for it, but we agreed that we liked the PC and Saturn versions more. I remember we did play Madden 64 a bit and Mortal Kombat Trilogy on N64 and Saturn. But beyond that it was mostly First Party and Rare titles for the N64.

If I were to rate the systems of that Generation today, I'd rate them in the following order:
1) Sega Saturn - With the ability to get games online this system really has opened up as a wonderful system worth owning.
2) Nintendo 64 - Great Nintendo and Rare multiplayer games. Most third party titles though either had a Generic Feeling or I had already played on previous systems. The Nintendo and Rare titles make it worth owning though
3) Playstation - Honestly, beyond Square Enix RPGs and titles from Konami, there's not much on this to keep my interest. Most of it's exclusives have not aged well both graphically and gameplay wise, and some of it's better exclusives like Resident Evil are available in better forms on the Dreamcast and Gamecube.

Back when when these systems were the current generation of consoles, I'd swap the places of the Saturn and N64, simply because at the time finding Saturn games was rather difficult. What few games I had for the system though, I loved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goldenband

During the 32-bit years I was in college. Among my college friends (and family members) who were into gaming, I knew absolutely no one who owned a PlayStation, or even expressed interest in getting one. Fifth-gen console ownership in my circle was about 90% N64, and 10% Sega Saturn...[...], and a surprising number of people who weren't really interested in anything past the SNES (seriously, that was the case even then).

[...] it also had to do with [...] especially, brand loyalty. It took a while before it was clear that PlayStation was going to be a complete success, and meanwhile people were willing to wait for the rumored next-gen Nintendo system. Why? Because they knew Nintendo, knew their track record, and had a sense of what to expect: continuity with the past decade of gaming experiences.

---

That was my experience as well.

90% of my gaming friends (maybe a dozen people) were die-hard Nintendo fans, they were in their early 20's and were completely content to continue playing their SNESs
A handful of us were psyched for the Saturn release but everyone else was waiting for the Ultra64. The Saturn launched and it was too expensive with a poor selection of games. So now like 99% of us were all in for an U64.
Mario 64, Mario Kart 64, F-Zero 64, Star Wars games, and Zelda OoT were the games my friends in their mid 20's were playing back at the end of the 90's (plus a few were into the Army Man games, some wrestling crap, and the N64 Resident Evil games)

No one I knew had a PS1.
edit: I take that back... a friend in Salt Lake City had a PS1 around '96 or '97 and no-one played it except for some wrestling game (they were by no means "gamers" anyhow). And then at the time Metal Gear Solid came out a friend in Baltimore had a chipped PS1 with a stack of CDRs but all they played was Metal Gear Solid anyway. The whole crew of people in I knew Baltimore played Goldeneye like it was their job.

I should also mention, I got a N64 the week of launch, I was playing my Genesis up until then and well after. I didn't get a Saturn (used package deal) until the next year, at that point I was playing both the N64 and Saturn roughly equally. Some time later, I was well into Zelda OoT when I finally was able to get a restocked copy of Panzer Dragoon Saga. I alternated between both games for a while. I wanted to finish OoT before devoting my time to PDS, I was in Ganandorf's castle toward the end of OoT when I just couldn't see it as anything other than a waste of my time. That was the end of my interest in Zelda games, right then and there. PDS outclassed OoT in so many ways. I never did finish OoT, I went back to it like a year later, and I just wasn't interested at all. Meanwhile I've played through PDS maybe a half dozen times.
And then once I discovered import gaming for the Saturn that's when the N64 just collected dust at my place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

I was 27 when the N64 came out.

---

So taking into account the younger videogaming scene of the 90s (a time during which it was generally socially unacceptable to be playing games in your 30s) you actually was at one of the extreme ends, by the time the N64 came out you probably had very little time for gaming at all, and very little contact with friends, who were mostly going to be working hard for promotions, getting their own places, and thinking about settling down, a very different environment to the average 90s gamer, who would've been in school, or college, or not yet settled into a long term job, and still living with their parents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

I usually found that the families with kids between the ages of 6-16 had N64s, while in the dorms it was predominantly Playstation and later Xbox and PS2.

---

Firstly your local area doesn't interest anybody, and doesn't mean anything, all places are not the same.

Secondly its hardly surprising to be predominantly finding Playstations, the Playstation massively outsold the N64 in pretty much all age brackets, at the time, amongst my own age bracket N64 ownership was like 1/4 at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

I've said it before, as well as others have, that you'll find that the biggest supporters of the N64, generally fit in the age range I've described.

---

Teenagers may not be particularly good judges of merit, but they are also the people who have the most access to different games and systems, and differing opinions, I was in a class of like 25 people I saw everyday, and every type of lesson threw me into different classes of 25 people on a weekly basis, and thats not even counting those in the year below me whom I met at break times, and the fact that many of those children had older siblings whom they effectively parroted.

Outside of that younger teenagers would be less self concious about the themes of the games they are playing, and just appreciate good gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Those gamers that were in their early teens during that time, enjoyed the console more and are more passionate about it's games and hardware.

---

Owners who were Teenagers at the time are no more passionate about N64 games than proffessional reviewers were, and still are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neozeedeater

Yeah, there definitely seems to be a correlation. I would be interested in seeing how many people that owned all three major consoles that gen would pick the N64 as #1. I'm guessing it would be a small percentage.

---

Me too, it would most certainly be higher than the Saturn would get though, most Saturn owners sold their systems in 1997 and migrated to Playstation.

Britain is filled with mainstreamers my age who owned Saturns thinking they would be as all-consuming as the Mega Drive, sold their machines, and continue to absolutely despise the machine to this day, I actually usually end up having to defend the Saturn against mainstreamers who owned it at the time.

None of this means anything though, owning a system doesn't automatically give you a good idea of it, as most of the UK Saturn owners prove, as far as most mainstreamers in Britain are concerned (including prior owners) the Saturn had 3 or 4 worthwhile games on it, Sega Rally, Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Worldwide Soccer, and Virtua Cop, and it had some ports of big PS1 titles, they have very little understanding of its library at all, in fact, with the way you guys keep bringing up a handful of high profile N64 games you all kinda' remind me of them :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thenewguy

Me too, it would most certainly be higher than the Saturn would get though

---

I'm not convinced the N64 would be more popular than the Saturn in that crowd (especially in NA where the Saturn sold horribly and was mostly owned by diehard Sega fans, i.e. usually hardcore gamer types). If someone had all three systems in that era, he was obviously a hardcore gamer and probably imported games, too. You probably wouldn't buy all three unless you wanted variety. The N64 doesn't have as much quantity and variety of good games as the other two. I was lucky enough to have all three and I ranked them Playstation > Saturn > Nintendo 64. But like said before, even third best can be pretty awesome.

At the time, I worked at a couple stores where I interacted with lots of younger people and adults. For everything I saw and heard, especially judging from rental and new and used stores, it seemed that the Nintendo 64 was mostly played by younger kids and early teens. Even after that generation to this day, it skews younger than Playstation ans Saturn.

I'm not judging the library or the image the N64 was marketed with, but at least around here, it's always been more of a kiddy console. It was also the system most girls and women played. In particular, they all loved Mario 64.

During that generation, the Playstation had the image that the Genesis held previously. Everyone who wanted to play hip, cool, edgy games, complete with trendy music soundtracks, all owned a Playstation. The Nintendo 64 rarely had Rob Zombie music in its soundtracks.