What consoles didn't succeed but are good?

[RH | 4,895]

55 minutes ago, cj_robot said:

I guess I can understand why people didn't like the Wii U design, but I thought it was great. I loved playing games on the tablet. I could be chilling on the couch playing games while still hanging with my wife and kid while they watch TV. To me, it was like a new Nintendo portable,  but with a bigger screen and better games. My only gripe was that I couldn't take it anywhere in the house. The Switch is really just the full realization of the vision they had for the Wii U, I believe.

I completely agree.  The Switch is Nintendo doubling-down on the Wii-U, which is very uncharacteristic of them considering it was a bit of a failure.  I'm glad they did.  I LOVE the dual nature of the Switch.

It goes with my on vacations, I play it before going to bed, and I play it on the TV with the kids.  It's just a great balance.  I don't mind that it could have probably had additional horsepower if the form-factor was twice it's size. It's good enough and the versatility makes up for it.

Still, it's hard to imagine a Switch without Nintendo first learning from their mistakes with the Wii U.

[peg | 370]

I was also under the impression that the Dreamcast did really well in the US but Sega's reputation was so tarnished in Japan that they called it quits before the thing could really get off the ground.  There was like 250 games released in the US, not that far off of the N64...

 

The obvious one is TG-16

4 hours ago, RH said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Dreamcast do "well"?  It was just to little, to late to save SEGA.  I remember a LOT of people getting the DC.  It was fair priced, had a good line up.  A solid set of good, early games, but even with all of that going, it seemed that SEGA had already slid to far to having close their hardware doors to even survive.

Of course, you might say that those facts make it obvious that the DC didn't do well.  However, it's my opinion that the demise of SEGA hardware didn't have to do with poor DC sells or hype, it had to do with SEGA itself and struggling to keep up with a modern, changing hardware market.

 

[T-Pac | 7,513]

8 hours ago, glazball said:

Bally Professional Arcade, aka Astrocade.

It was the Neo Geo of the 70s.  Spec-wise it totally blew away the competition, the controllers are incredible and it had some really cool games in its small library.  We'll probably never know the console's full potential due to poor support and lack of attention.  Even now, a good chunk of retro gamers have never heard of it.

Great call on the Astrocade - I've wanted one of these ever since I learned about them. The controllers are especially cool since the joystick also twists like a paddle if I recall correctly. Isn't this one of those early systems where the sound comes directly from the console rather than channeling through the TV speakers?

-CasualCart

[fox | 1,665]

Every Sega console not named Genesis

TG16

Neo Geo home consoles

PSP

[Tanooki | 4,929]

I'd have to agree warmly, not a dry concede on the WiiU doing one thing right, off tv play.  Despite the limited range it gave a taste of effective freedom.  I used it quite a bit in that mode when I had it for the first half of it's failed life.  It's a shame it was like their most horrific and painfully dragged out bomb given the damage it did to the company.  I think if I recall correctly it was the only time in their history in the video game period (if not company wide) where they turned not only a quarter of losses but year over year too.  Had the 3DS not propped it up as much as that thing could the damage could have been far more devastating.

[Nintegageo | 582]

I think there can be some debate on certain Sega consoles.

The SMS has never stopped being made/sold in Brazil. Yep, they even make them today which is pretty amazing.
The Game Gear could also be mentioned. It didn't sell Game Boy #s but it lived 1990-1997 which is pretty impressive.

I should plug my 32x in and see whether it deserves a mention.

[captmorgandrinker | 1,649]

Definitely PSP, especially when you throw in the Japanese stuff.

[Rooster | 124]

I always wanted to love the PSP and really tried to convince myself to buy a vita, but any time I went to the store and looked at the games, it was just littered with dating sims.  Couldnt bring myself to care about it at all. 

 

My vote would probably also go for the TG16.  It is such an impressive console, and has some really great games, and even superior versions of multi platform releases.  It was an impressive piece of tech for the time.

[G-type | 2,476]

Atari 7800 is a good console that bombed. It is pretty comparable to the NES in its capabilities and it can handle arcade style games even better (NES always starts to slow down any time there are too many objects on the screen) It had the built-in backwards compatibility with the 2600 which was huge, especially considering its software library is pretty paltry. The biggest flaw was that they didn't build in the pokey sound chip, so it could play multichannel music like its rivals. The few games that have it (Commando, BallBlazer, etc) show that it really was essential. Also, the controllers were kinda wack, but luckily you can use 2600 Joysticks, Genesis controllers, 3rd party, or the European 7800 controllers which had a slightly better controller design.

Edited November 12, 2019 by G-type

[elprincipe | 142]

Definitely agree on the SMS, TG-16, and Wii U. The TG-16 you could play portably as well, with the TurboExpress! Just such a great system and so sad it didn't succeed in the U.S., we would have gotten translations for a lot of games that remain Japan-only.

I'd add to the list the Vectrex. A unique system with striking vector graphics, a great controller, and some pretty fun games! If you haven't experienced it's like no other out there and may take you back to the days of vector-based arcade machines.

[Foochie776 | 1,051]

I enjoyed the Wii U a lot. 

[MrMark0673 | 197]

At one point Matt had a complete SMS US collection and a complete Vectrex collection (less Mr. Boston).

Both criminally underrated systems, but if I had to choose one I'd say Vectrex.  Incredible graphics, unique gameplay, and in my opinion has the definitive version of Berzerk, ever more so than the arcade.  Fortress of Narzod was a favorite as well.

Fairly cheap and most of the games can be legally downloaded and played on a multi-cart.  It's a system I always recommend people check out if they haven't already.

[MachineCode | 159]

My issue with the Wii U was that they forced the tablet where it wasn’t necessary. For example, you couldn’t use Netflix without the tablet despiser the fact that regular controllers were suitable. So when watching a movie, I had to constantly have a tablet running the video and draining its battery. Also, the system settings. Literally no reason to force you to use the tablet to make a simple setting change.

[Tulpa | 3,488]

22 hours ago, RH said:

I completely agree.  The Switch is Nintendo doubling-down on the Wii-U, which is very uncharacteristic of them considering it was a bit of a failure.  I'm glad they did.  I LOVE the dual nature of the Switch.

 

I can understand why they released the Wii U. Nintendo needed a hi-def console to compete with Sony and Microsoft until the Switch was fully developed for release. Kind of makes for bad press if you don't have an HD offering in the decade span between the Wii and Switch.

[DefaultGen | 5,396]

Wii U games are the bomb, which is why they were all ported to Switch.

Odyssey^2 obviously "lost" to Atari but it's a pretty good console. Nearly every game is exclusive and it has some cool gimmicks like the board games. I'll take Pick Axe Pete over most of the shitty early 8-bit Donkey Kong ports.

Lynx has a lot of great games, but has sooo many ports so it's not super interesting to me personally. Kind of my same deal with Colecovision and Atari 7800.

Edited November 12, 2019 by DefaultGen

[mbd39 | 2,017]

12 hours ago, G-type said:

Atari 7800 is a good console that bombed. It is pretty comparable to the NES in its capabilities and it can handle arcade style games even better (NES always starts to slow down any time there are too many objects on the screen) It had the built-in backwards compatibility with the 2600 which was huge, especially considering its software library is pretty paltry. The biggest flaw was that they didn't build in the pokey sound chip, so it could play multichannel music like its rivals. The few games that have it (Commando, BallBlazer, etc) show that it really was essential. Also, the controllers were kinda wack, but luckily you can use 2600 Joysticks, Genesis controllers, 3rd party, or the European 7800 controllers which had a slightly better controller design.

I had an Atari 7800 as a kid before I got a NES. We went from 2600 to 7800 due to the backwards compatibility.

I had a big pile of 2600 games but only a few that were 7800; just Ms. Pac-Man, Food Fight, Dig Dug and Pole Position II. They were fun but didn't exactly show off the system's power so it doesn't seem like much of an improvement over the 2600. My friend had a NES and games like Mike Tyson's Punch Out that blew me away at the time. What I wanted was a NES which I finally got for Christmas in 1989.

Yeah, both the 7800 and SMS were capable systems but didn't have much of a chance considering Nintendo's stranglehold on the industry at the time. Atari didn't help matters with the uncomfortable controller and no Pokey on the console.

 

 

[attakid101 | 267]

On 11/11/2019 at 8:25 AM, RH said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Dreamcast do "well"?  It was just to little, to late to save SEGA.  I remember a LOT of people getting the DC.  It was fair priced, had a good line up.  A solid set of good, early games, but even with all of that going, it seemed that SEGA had already slid to far to having close their hardware doors to even survive.

Of course, you might say that those facts make it obvious that the DC didn't do well.  However, it's my opinion that the demise of SEGA hardware didn't have to do with poor DC sells or hype, it had to do with SEGA itself and struggling to keep up with a modern, changing hardware market.

No and no. The Dreamcast didn’t do well. The Saturn actually outsold it. And if anything, Sega was too forward thinking. Their failure didn’t really have anything to do with their inability to keep up.

[glazball | 168]

20 hours ago, CasualCart said:

Great call on the Astrocade - I've wanted one of these ever since I learned about them. The controllers are especially cool since the joystick also twists like a paddle if I recall correctly. Isn't this one of those early systems where the sound comes directly from the console rather than channeling through the TV speakers?

-CasualCart

Regarding audio: you may be thinking of the first version of the Channel F, but the next revision (the System II which I believe is more common) ran the audio through the tv.  The RCA Studio II also had sound coming from the console.  However, both of those consoles imo are not "good" lol.  I know there are a few Channel F fans out there, and I think they are neat (being the first cart based system and all), but the games aged very poorly and aren't really worth the time.

The Astrocade's controllers are amazing.  You hold it like a ColecoVision Super Action Controller and like you mentioned, the top of the joystick also twists like a paddle.  One of the best games on the system is a homebrew called War - a clone of Warlords.  I only have 2 controllers (and not enough obliging friends!), but one day I hope to enjoy some 4p Astrocade action.

[peg | 370]

3 hours ago, attakid101 said:

No and no. The Dreamcast didn’t do well. The Saturn actually outsold it. And if anything, Sega was too forward thinking. Their failure didn’t really have anything to do with their inability to keep up.

This is debatable.  The Dreamcast sold pretty well in the US while flopping hard in Japan.   The Saturn was the other way around, flopped hard in the US but was actually pretty successful in Japan, even selling more than the N64, Gamecube and Wii U in that region.

[attakid101 | 267]

1 hour ago, peg said:

This is debatable.  The Dreamcast sold pretty well in the US while flopping hard in Japan.   The Saturn was the other way around, flopped hard in the US but was actually pretty successful in Japan, even selling more than the N64, Gamecube and Wii U in that region.

Everything I’ve read says that the Saturn moved more units than the Dreamcast. And I’m talking total units—irrespective of region.

[nrslam | 474]

5 minutes ago, attakid101 said:

Everything I’ve read says that the Saturn moved more units than the Dreamcast. And I’m talking total units—irrespective of region.

Wikipedia says 9.26M Saturns and 9.13M Dreamcasts worldwide, pretty much a tie, but the Saturn was on the market for about twice as long as the DC so the Dreamcast was a faster seller.

[captmorgandrinker | 1,649]

11 minutes ago, attakid101 said:

Everything I’ve read says that the Saturn moved more units than the Dreamcast. And I’m talking total units—irrespective of region.

Yeah, but I'll bet you can name several friends that had a Dreamcast during its active years, but would be hard pressed to name any with a Saturn.

[RH | 4,895]

45 minutes ago, captmorgandrinker said:

Yeah, but I'll bet you can name several friends that had a Dreamcast during its active years, but would be hard pressed to name any with a Saturn.

I had only one friend that had a Saturn and, subsequently, it was the only one I ever saw that wasn't on a store shelf.]

But the DC.  Everyone had a DC in college.

[Tanooki | 4,929]

I knew no one with a Saturn until I found a co-worker selling one in 2001 which I bought, then got some import games for as much as US since the library (like PCE) was weak compared.  Had Sega not repeatedly shot themselves like it felt good and was fun, the DC would have stomped the Saturn given it sold almost the same total games in a fraction of the time.  Sure it would have been weak and less cool against the 3 that were there in 2001 forward, but it was also the cheaper system so Sega could have positioned it as the $100-150 budget box and done alright I would hope.

[TriHart | 88]

I'm going to parrot the Dreamcast, even though, as mentioned above, the console itself wasn't a failure, just the handling of it in the markets was kind of a failure. It had so much going for it, but the console was just hemoraging money from Sega in manufacturing costs vs sales costs, not to mention the competition it was up against at the time, also battling poor Japanese sales. 

 

So many great games though... Albiet with some real stinkers mixed in, but which consoles don't. 

 

Liner notes- I've never had the opportunity yet to play around with a Saturn, therefore I default to DC

Edited November 15, 2019 by TriHart