• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Social Opinion Hardware The best ENGINEERED console of each generation

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
Let's talk about the generations of video game consoles and the engineering of the hardware respective of the time...

First Generation is actually Pong machines.

I say the Coleco Telstar series and Nintendo Color TV game systems take this one IMO

2nd Gen:

Atari 2600
Intellivision

I'm open to other options, but the Atari 2600/VCS gets my vote.

3rd Gen:

NES/Famicom
SG1000/Colecovision
Atari 7800
MSX

I choose the NES/Famicom. Released in July 1983, it was vastly superior to it's contemporaries in regards to videogames both in graphics, audio, and cost. The Sega Master System/ Mark III was late in the game and basically a mid-gen console.

4th Gen:

PC Engine/TurboGrafx 16
Genesis/MegaDrive
SNES
NEOGEO
Maybe the CDi lol

I say SNES. It boasted colors, audio, effects, and affordability above the competition. Again, the games show this IMO.

5th Gen:

3DO
Atari Jaguar
PS1
N64
Saturn

I say the PS1. It offered the power and storage to deliver the games of the time. Look at the library and success. Yeah, the N64 was more powerful, but it came out more than a year later and was hamstringed by low storage.

6th Gen:

Dreamcast
PS2
Gamecube
Xbox

I say Gamecube. The most powerful per dollar by far. Great conversion, library, and the architecture was so good they decided to use it twice.

7th Gen:

Wii
Xbox 360
PS3

I say the 360. Released a year ahead of it's contemporaries and was the best third party machine due to development ease and amazing capabilities. Also, the best online console to date by far.

8th Gen:

PS4
Xbox One
PS4Pro
Xbox One X
Wii U

This is a weird gen to me. Mid gen refreshes. Based on the originally released hardware... PS4 was the best designed and positioned perfectly from the capabilities to cost. More for less. But the Xbox One X is one of the best engineered consoles I've ever held and I rode the last end of the gen on that. Quiet, cool, powerful and the best versions of games til recently.

9th Gen:

Switch
PS5
Xbox Series X

The Switch is the most capable portable console of all time (I'm not including tablets and phones.... they are not consoles/ dedicated game hardware). And I'm not sure about the PS5 vs Xbox Series X... seems too early to tell. I think the Series X is physically designed better than the PS5, it's features are better as far as BC and online IMO, but this comparison has yet to really unfold. They are the same price, they are similar in power, and I am not sure what system will be better in the end. From an engineering standpoint.... what will be the easiest to develope for when the tools develope, what will have more capabilities, etc. The Switch is another beast altogether...

Up in the air for me.

Thoughts?

BTW.... NOT your favorite console of each gen, but the best designed/engineered on the basis of these factors:
1) Power
2) Cost
3) Development
4) Capabilities
5) Time Frame
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Dec 25, 2019
11,788
22,581
1,025
Prague, Czech Republic
I can only speak from the 7th gen, so for me 360 then Xbox One X and then...well I would say HW is Series X, SW is for PS5, like an OS and whole SDK and stuff. And this one is not even close.

Also I don't really understand this: The Switch is the most capable portable console of all time

That's almost to a triggered reaction. I am currently helping (externally, do not think that I could be a proper Saber employee, sadly too dumb or/and inexperienced) with Kingdom Come: Deliverance* for Switch and that piece o<don't want to get banned here> console could go and [redacted] and whole Nintendo should be [redacted]

And I am saying all of this while being massive nVidia fanboy, so it pains me somewhat, but I have to...

So yeah...

*again helping with streaming engine, which was wrote with great precision and held together by duck tape, maybe that's why I (and few others) were summoned.
 
Last edited:

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Sep 5, 2007
12,077
13,889
1,820
UK
I don't know, you could say the PS2 & PS3 was over engineered
Whereas the GCN was very simple for what was available tech wise.
 
Feb 23, 2018
2,430
5,776
545
It is hard to argue against the PS2 Slim though, that thing was unreal.

 
Jan 29, 2019
6,889
7,684
520
4th Gen:

PC Engine/TurboGrafx 16
Genesis/MegaDrive
SNES
NEOGEO
Maybe the CDi lol

I say SNES. It boasted colors, audio, effects, and affordability above the competition. Again, the games show this IMO.
I'd say the PC-Engine, it was released in 1987 in Japan, yet it held up all the way to 1994. It was not completely blown out of the water when the Genesis and SNES came along, the CD addon for it had amazing games for its time.
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
I'd say the PC-Engine, it was released in 1987 in Japan, yet it held up all the way to 1994. It was not completely blown out of the water when the Genesis and SNES came along, the CD addon for it had amazing games for its time.
I agree that it was one hell of a kit. That's a tough gen for me to decide, but I still think the SNES really lasted the longest and gave us the best experiences based on it's hardware. But yeah, 1987 versus 1990 right?
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
The 360 launch was good but the RROD definitely overshadowed it for me. Its mid life was good but in its later years it was more focused on trying to be like the wii. With the Xbox kinect and those wii like characters
I understand the RROD fiasco... but the reality is it was still an amazing designed system. It just had a flaw at the time that was fixed.
 

nani17

Member
May 3, 2018
2,164
4,330
535
I understand the RROD fiasco... but the reality is it was still an amazing designed system. It just had a flaw at the time that was fixed.
They tried to fix it but failed the first time. Again for me the RROD showed that the system was completely rushed to the market in order to get ahead of the ps3.

They reckon up to 24% of console RROD'd. That isn't good engineering at all.
 
Last edited:

Arioco

Member
Jun 23, 2013
381
1,268
720
Let's talk about the generations of video game consoles and the engineering of the hardware respective of the time...

First Generation is actually Pong machines.

I say the Coleco Telstar series and Nintendo Color TV game systems take this one IMO

2nd Gen:

Atari 2600
Intellivision

I'm open to other options, but the Atari 2600/VCS gets my vote.

3rd Gen:

NES/Famicom
SG1000/Colecovision
Atari 7800
MSX

I choose the NES/Famicom. Released in July 1983, it was vastly superior to it's contemporaries in regards to videogames both in graphics, audio, and cost. The Sega Master System/ Mark III was late in the game and basically a mid-gen console.

4th Gen:

PC Engine/TurboGrafx 16
Genesis/MegaDrive
SNES
NEOGEO
Maybe the CDi lol

I say SNES. It boasted colors, audio, effects, and affordability above the competition. Again, the games show this IMO.

5th Gen:

3DO
Atari Jaguar
PS1
N64
Saturn

I say the PS1. It offered the power and storage to deliver the games of the time. Look at the library and success. Yeah, the N64 was more powerful, but it came out more than a year later and was hamstringed by low storage.

6th Gen:

Dreamcast
PS2
Gamecube
Xbox

I say Gamecube. The most powerful per dollar by far. Great conversion, library, and the architecture was so good they decided to use it twice.

7th Gen:

Wii
Xbox 360
PS3

I say the 360. Released a year ahead of it's contemporaries and was the best third party machine due to development ease and amazing capabilities. Also, the best online console to date by far.

8th Gen:

PS4
Xbox One
PS4Pro
Xbox One X
Wii U

This is a weird gen to me. Mid gen refreshes. Based on the originally released hardware... PS4 was the best designed and positioned perfectly from the capabilities to cost. More for less. But the Xbox One X is one of the best engineered consoles I've ever held and I rode the last end of the gen on that. Quiet, cool, powerful and the best versions of games til recently.

9th Gen:

Switch
PS5
Xbox Series X

The Switch is the most capable portable console of all time (I'm not including tablets and phones.... they are not consoles/ dedicated game hardware). And I'm not sure about the PS5 vs Xbox Series X... seems too early to tell. I think the Series X is physically designed better than the PS5, it's features are better as far as BC and online IMO, but this comparison has yet to really unfold. They are the same price, they are similar in power, and I am not sure what system will be better in the end. From an engineering standpoint.... what will be the easiest to develope for when the tools develope, what will have more capabilities, etc. The Switch is another beast altogether...

Up in the air for me.

Thoughts?

BTW.... NOT your favorite console of each gen, but the best designed/engineered on the basis of these factors:
1) Power
2) Cost
3) Development
4) Capabilities
5) Time Frame


I didn't expect this, but to my surprise I got to say I agree with you on all of them.


I would only say that even though I prefer Snes I have to give credit to Genesis for releasing years earlier and still being able to compete against Snes. As for GameCube, I choose it only if we take into account the performance/price. Obviously XBOX was more powerful overall, but in my country GC was 199 euros and Xbox was 478. It was a huge difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid Of Bee

bender

Candy Corn Aficionado
Apr 12, 2010
12,465
22,246
1,480
7th Generation is tough. You have to factor reliability when talking about engineering and the 360 is a failure in that regard. Pit that against Ken Kutaragi's death nail system design. Maybe the answer is the Wii or rather, each system should be listed as DNP in this contest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayK47

Trogdor1123

Member
Mar 2, 2012
10,077
3,416
965
Gen 2.

Not too sure, I'd lean towards the 2600 though.

Gen 3.

Easily the NES

Gen 4.

Neogeo easy, it wasn't cheap but it mirrored high end arcade gear. It was awesome.

Gen 5.

PS1, easy to make games for, used CDs. There were stories about the audio chip being from high end audio gear.

Gen 6.

GameCube. Super solid construction that hit way above its weight for power. It's a good unit. Crappy medium though. Xbox was a close second place for me.

Gen 7.

PS3 for BluRay. Take that out then it's 360 for sure

Gen 8.

Xbox one x, it's super late to game though so maybe the WiiU due it's lagless screen?

Gen 9.

Too early but I'd say ps5 so far. It should be entirely outclassed by the Xbox but it's not at all.
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
7th Generation is tough. You have to factor reliability when talking about engineering and the 360 is a failure in that regard. Pit that against Ken Kutaragi's death nail system design. Maybe the answer is the Wii or rather, each system should be listed as DNP in this contest.
I know what the facts are, but the only two consoles to ever fail me are the PS2 and PS3.

I still have a launch Xbox 360. I know about RROD but the reality is it was still a really good console for how was engineered and it just came down to a simple failing component in the soldering.
 

Hugare

Member
Sep 8, 2019
1,470
3,344
480
Snes over Genesis, OP?

PS1 over N64?

Wii was nuts. "It has a vertical controller with like, 4 buttons?!" "Motion sensors?"

It turned the whole industry upside down

Nintendo was at the top of their game
 

Brofist

Member
Jun 15, 2004
11,114
1,460
1,765
NES
Genesis
PS1
Xbox
Xbox 360
PS4

It's too early on the current gen to tell
 
Last edited:
  • Strength
Reactions: RetroAV

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
Snes over Genesis, OP?

PS1 over N64?

Wii was nuts. "It has a vertical controller with like, 4 buttons?!" "Motion sensors?"

It turned the whole industry upside down

Nintendo was at the top of their game
Let me state for the record that I'm a Nintendo fanboy all day.

But yes, PS1 over N64. It came out a year earlier and pushed as many polygons if not more. It also did 2D games which the N64 for some reason never got much. And it was hamstrung by the cartridge format which didn't allow it for the bigger games that were coming out in that era.

I agree that the Wii was special but from our standpoint of technology it was kind of lackluster and just gave us some controls that were different but didn't end up being the way that we control things now. I really do miss some of those innovations and it was probably one of the most innovative consoles if not the most innovative cons of all time. But I'm talking about the actual hardware and what it brought to the table. Not just then but now. We don't use those types of controls now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Holammer

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
The PS2 and even the PS1 had drive issues but I'm not trying to bring hardware failure rates into this. It's really just about the overall concept in engineering of the system and the Xbox 360 actually overcame these issues eventually. I get what you're saying but I'm not really going on about that because otherwise it really muddies the waters on the systems.
 
May 22, 2018
3,355
7,972
540
Let's talk about the generations of video game consoles and the engineering of the hardware respective of the time...

First Generation is actually Pong machines.

I say the Coleco Telstar series and Nintendo Color TV game systems take this one IMO

2nd Gen:

Atari 2600
Intellivision

I'm open to other options, but the Atari 2600/VCS gets my vote.

3rd Gen:

NES/Famicom
SG1000/Colecovision
Atari 7800
MSX

I choose the NES/Famicom. Released in July 1983, it was vastly superior to it's contemporaries in regards to videogames both in graphics, audio, and cost. The Sega Master System/ Mark III was late in the game and basically a mid-gen console.

4th Gen:

PC Engine/TurboGrafx 16
Genesis/MegaDrive
SNES
NEOGEO
Maybe the CDi lol

I say SNES. It boasted colors, audio, effects, and affordability above the competition. Again, the games show this IMO.

5th Gen:

3DO
Atari Jaguar
PS1
N64
Saturn

I say the PS1. It offered the power and storage to deliver the games of the time. Look at the library and success. Yeah, the N64 was more powerful, but it came out more than a year later and was hamstringed by low storage.

6th Gen:

Dreamcast
PS2
Gamecube
Xbox

I say Gamecube. The most powerful per dollar by far. Great conversion, library, and the architecture was so good they decided to use it twice.

7th Gen:

Wii
Xbox 360
PS3

I say the 360. Released a year ahead of it's contemporaries and was the best third party machine due to development ease and amazing capabilities. Also, the best online console to date by far.

8th Gen:

PS4
Xbox One
PS4Pro
Xbox One X
Wii U

This is a weird gen to me. Mid gen refreshes. Based on the originally released hardware... PS4 was the best designed and positioned perfectly from the capabilities to cost. More for less. But the Xbox One X is one of the best engineered consoles I've ever held and I rode the last end of the gen on that. Quiet, cool, powerful and the best versions of games til recently.

9th Gen:

Switch
PS5
Xbox Series X

The Switch is the most capable portable console of all time (I'm not including tablets and phones.... they are not consoles/ dedicated game hardware). And I'm not sure about the PS5 vs Xbox Series X... seems too early to tell. I think the Series X is physically designed better than the PS5, it's features are better as far as BC and online IMO, but this comparison has yet to really unfold. They are the same price, they are similar in power, and I am not sure what system will be better in the end. From an engineering standpoint.... what will be the easiest to develope for when the tools develope, what will have more capabilities, etc. The Switch is another beast altogether...

Up in the air for me.

Thoughts?

BTW.... NOT your favorite console of each gen, but the best designed/engineered on the basis of these factors:
1) Power
2) Cost
3) Development
4) Capabilities
5) Time Frame

Did you for real just call the 360 the best engineered console of that generation
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
I already know this. I do appreciate your input. But the reality is I still think the system was designed pretty darn well considering it was released a year earlier than the competition and outperformed it. But what you're saying is something to consider. That's why I'm asking for everyone's opinions.
 

captainraincoat

Gold Member
Nov 15, 2010
5,796
9,576
1,350
Gen 2.

2600...this thing could take punishment and the damn things still work to this day without issue

Gen 3.

Defiantly the NES...the Sega systems were solid but nintendo really bought gaming back into the mainstream
and it had a solid library of games to back up the hardware which was always reliable

Gen 4.

i would actually say it was a Tie between the Megadrive and the SNES
both were solid systems and were absolute tanks in terms of reliability

Gen 5.

PS1...very simple console when you pull it apart but was actually the best made sony console

Gen 6.

Im gonna say Dreamcast..it took their learnings from their Saturn/megardive/mega cd and refined them into a sony beating console
its just a shame that the people steering the ship could not get it to hit the mark but this console was ahead of its time in many areas like Graphics/internet capability and accessories

Gen 7.

Wii ......first console which really bought motion controls into the focus again and was actually well made
and helped nintendo climb back to the top again

Gen 8.

Xbox one x ....takes everything that was wrong with the base xbox one and makes it better

Gen 9.

Series X...its Silent..much more compact and its functionality is much better fleshed out than the ps5 i think
going through multiple dual sense controllers and coil whine would really have me marking the ps5 as the worst made sony console
 
Aug 28, 2019
4,859
9,854
650
www.instagram.com
3rd Gen: Sega Master System (overall)

Superior hardware to NES, and also had better video-out support for various displays. It also had a better ergonomically-designed controller. Dunno why you'd not include Master System in there when N64 was quite "late" for its gen (late 1996, even early 1997 in Europe) too but still counts as 5th-gen

4th Gen: Super Nintendo/Super Famicom (overall)

I'm considering price to performance here as well as market size, so for the dollar value I think SNES/SFC takes it. Unlike MegaDrive or especially PC-Engine you didn't have to buy a ton of add-ons to get more power out of the base system, and in MOST (but not all areas; i.e MegaDrive having better CPU speed and RAM bandwidth, PC-Engine supporting more on-screen colors (482 or 484 IIRC, vs. SNES/SFC's 256) areas having better specs.

5th Gen: Sony PlayStation (specs and production pipeline), Sega Saturn & Nintendo 64 (build quality)

Best balance of specs for the price, most of the design was done with in-house fabbing and production which helped keep the design simple and cheap allowing for easier reduction of production costs (and thus MSRP to customers) compared to rivals. Although I would say this gets tricky once talking durability: both the N64 and Saturn had better build quality on average than the PS1, meaning the average N64 or Saturn unit would last you longer than the average PS1 before needing to do repairs on it or get a replacement.

6th Gen: Nintendo Gamecube (build quality/ergonomics, most specs (compared to PS2 at least))

Offered better performance in almost every area than PS2 while being more affordable, more durable build quality, smaller (taking up less shelf space), cooler, quieter, and a better controller ergonomically. This might actually be the easiest to pick from gen-wise because tech-wise there were features PS2 lacked that Gamecube and OG Xbox had, meanwhile OG Xbox could not price-reduce in a manageable way due to the Nvidia agreement and the CPU they used wasn't the most power-efficient either (altho it did have some QOL advantages such as a build-in HDD and ethernet by default, which neither Gamecube nor PS2 had without buying extra hardware).

7th Gen: Sony PS3 (build quality/user upgradable options/QOL), Xbox 360 (internal architecture)

Although it had YLOD, that wasn't as big a problem as RROD was for 360. It had built-in Wifi out of the gate (originally you needed a separate module for 360 until Microsoft built it in by default with later revisions starting 2007/2008 IIRC), higher resolution output support (IIRC), more USB options and higher-definition Blu-Ray by default (360 was stuck with DVD).

Again, though, this gets a bit tricky, particularly once looking at internals. 360 had a unified memory pool, better shader support, and a more streamlined architecture overall. It had more than enough power for its time but more importantly the ease-of-use for devs to realize their ambitions sooner rather than later, and that always means a lot. There's a reason Sony took after the 360's design ethos when making the PS4. Speaking of which...

8th Gen: Sony PS4 (overall)

Better GPU, better memory, faster memory bandwidth, snappier OS, easier-to-use OS...this one is probably the overall easiest to decide upon. It also had a smaller footprint than the original XBO, and a PSU that was built into the system itself, while Microsoft was still going with a solution that was already out of fashion even in 2013, let alone today.

8.5 Gen: Xbox One X (overall)

Microsoft did turn the books on Sony with the mid-gen refreshes, though. PS4 Pro was big & bulky, and had some of the worst fan noise of a game console ever. One X ran a lot quieter, and with better build quality/durability to boot.

Current Gen: Series X (ergonomics/build quality), Tie? (PS5/Series X, specs)

I agree with you that in terms of specs/architectural features it's too early to say if either PS5 or Series X is better, however I think overall they'll essentially be tied in that respect. In terms of QOL features, build ergonomics and user features, though, in all ways other than internal storage upgradeability it seems like Series X is the better of the two systems.

That said, it may not STAY that way in the future, because Sony can always make adjustments to expand on OS-level QOL features, and maybe their PS5 refreshes (or a PS5 Pro) has better build quality than the current Series consoles or Microsoft's mid-gen refresh. All the same, if Microsoft addresses the internal storage issue with the proprietary expansion cards by just releasing a m.2-to-CF Express adapter then that solves what could be an issue on their end as time goes on.
 
Last edited:

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
Just look at the third party games. Once again I don't disagree with your sentiment. It's just that I'm looking more broadly I think.
Actually, I just want to add that if you're going to add hardware reliability to the contest then Sony is really bad at this.

Trust me, I collect all consoles and those are the worst for reliability in the long run and their controllers break really easy.

I've never had to replace controllers for any controllers. Anybody with me on this or am I alone?
3rd Gen: Sega Master System (overall)

Superior hardware to NES, and also had better video-out support for various displays. It also had a better ergonomically-designed controller. Dunno why you'd not include Master System in there when N64 was quite "late" for its gen (late 1996, even early 1997 in Europe) too but still counts as 5th-gen

4th Gen: Super Nintendo/Super Famicom (overall)

I'm considering price to performance here as well as market size, so for the dollar value I think SNES/SFC takes it. Unlike MegaDrive or especially PC-Engine you didn't have to buy a ton of add-ons to get more power out of the base system, and in MOST (but not all areas; i.e MegaDrive having better CPU speed and RAM bandwidth, PC-Engine supporting more on-screen colors (482 or 484 IIRC, vs. SNES/SFC's 256) areas having better specs.

5th Gen: Sony PlayStation (specs and production pipeline), Sega Saturn & Nintendo 64 (build quality)

Best balance of specs for the price, most of the design was done with in-house fabbing and production which helped keep the design simple and cheap allowing for easier reduction of production costs (and thus MSRP to customers) compared to rivals. Although I would say this gets tricky once talking durability: both the N64 and Saturn had better build quality on average than the PS1, meaning the average N64 or Saturn unit would last you longer than the average PS1 before needing to do repairs on it or get a replacement.

6th Gen: Nintendo Gamecube (build quality/ergonomics, most specs (compared to PS2 at least))

Offered better performance in almost every area than PS2 while being more affordable, more durable build quality, smaller (taking up less shelf space), cooler, quieter, and a better controller ergonomically. This might actually be the easiest to pick from gen-wise because tech-wise there were features PS2 lacked that Gamecube and OG Xbox had, meanwhile OG Xbox could not price-reduce in a manageable way due to the Nvidia agreement and the CPU they used wasn't the most power-efficient either (altho it did have some QOL advantages such as a build-in HDD and ethernet by default, which neither Gamecube nor PS2 had without buying extra hardware).

7th Gen: Sony PS3 (build quality/user upgradable options/QOL), Xbox 360 (internal architecture)

Although it had YLOD, that wasn't as big a problem as RROD was for 360. It had built-in Wifi out of the gate (originally you needed a separate module for 360 until Microsoft built it in by default with later revisions starting 2007/2008 IIRC), higher resolution output support (IIRC), more USB options and higher-definition Blu-Ray by default (360 was stuck with DVD).

Again, though, this gets a bit tricky, particularly once looking at internals. 360 had a unified memory pool, better shader support, and a more streamlined architecture overall. It had more than enough power for its time but more importantly the ease-of-use for devs to realize their ambitions sooner rather than later, and that always means a lot. There's a reason Sony took after the 360's design ethos when making the PS4. Speaking of which...

8th Gen: Sony PS4 (overall)

Better GPU, better memory, faster memory bandwidth, snappier OS, easier-to-use OS...this one is probably the overall easiest to decide upon. It also had a smaller footprint than the original XBO, and a PSU that was built into the system itself, while Microsoft was still going with a solution that was already out of fashion even in 2013, let alone today.

8.5 Gen: Xbox One X (overall)

Microsoft did turn the books on Sony with the mid-gen refreshes, though. PS4 Pro was big & bulky, and had some of the worst fan noise of a game console ever. One X ran a lot quieter, and with better build quality/durability to boot.

Current Gen: Series X (ergonomics/build quality), Tie? (PS5/Series X, specs)

I agree with you that in terms of specs/architectural features it's too early to say if either PS5 or Series X is better, however I think overall they'll essentially be tied in that respect. In terms of QOL features, build ergonomics and user features, though, in all ways other than internal storage upgradeability it seems like Series X is the better of the two systems.

That said, it may not STAY that way in the future, because Sony can always make adjustments to expand on OS-level QOL features, and maybe their PS5 refreshes (or a PS5 Pro) has better build quality than the current Series consoles or Microsoft's mid-gen refresh. All the same, if Microsoft addresses the internal storage issue with the proprietary expansion cards by just releasing a m.2-to-CF Express adapter then that solves what could be an issue on their end as time goes on.
Great answer and interesting to read.
 

Hugare

Member
Sep 8, 2019
1,470
3,344
480
Let me state for the record that I'm a Nintendo fanboy all day.

But yes, PS1 over N64. It came out a year earlier and pushed as many polygons if not more. It also did 2D games which the N64 for some reason never got much. And it was hamstrung by the cartridge format which didn't allow it for the bigger games that were coming out in that era.

I agree that the Wii was special but from our standpoint of technology it was kind of lackluster and just gave us some controls that were different but didn't end up being the way that we control things now. I really do miss some of those innovations and it was probably one of the most innovative consoles if not the most innovative cons of all time. But I'm talking about the actual hardware and what it brought to the table. Not just then but now. We don't use those types of controls now.
"Kind of lackluster" in terms of graphics, but sales proves that no one gave a shit about the Wii being a Game Cube 1.5 graphically.

It was such a monumental achievement in innovation that Sony and MS rushed to do the same with Move and Kinect.

"We dont use those types of controls now"? Every controller has gyroscope options nowadays. Every VR bundle has motion controls in it.

90% of VR games wouldnt exist without the Wii
 
  • LOL
Reactions: TLZ

Marty-McFly

Banned
Jul 2, 2021
1,712
4,241
465
NES
SNES
N64
GC
360
PS4
XboxSeriesX
*but Switch's form factor was ultimately the best and most lucrative idea
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
"Kind of lackluster" in terms of graphics, but sales proves that no one gave a shit about the Wii being a Game Cube 1.5 graphically.

It was such a monumental achievement in innovation that Sony and MS rushed to do the same with Move and Kinect.

"We dont use those types of controls now"? Every controller has gyroscope options nowadays. Every VR bundle has motion controls in it.

90% of VR
I wasn't talking about sales or anything and I agree that motion controls were amazing of the time. Maybe they are used more than I'm aware and that's fine. I get it because I do have a quest and quest 2 but regular video games just use what was invented 20 years ago. Modern controllers just do what previous controls did that much better.
 

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
3rd Gen: Sega Master System (overall)

Superior hardware to NES, and also had better video-out support for various displays. It also had a better ergonomically-designed controller. Dunno why you'd not include Master System in there when N64 was quite "late" for its gen (late 1996, even early 1997 in Europe) too but still counts as 5th-gen

4th Gen: Super Nintendo/Super Famicom (overall)

I'm considering price to performance here as well as market size, so for the dollar value I think SNES/SFC takes it. Unlike MegaDrive or especially PC-Engine you didn't have to buy a ton of add-ons to get more power out of the base system, and in MOST (but not all areas; i.e MegaDrive having better CPU speed and RAM bandwidth, PC-Engine supporting more on-screen colors (482 or 484 IIRC, vs. SNES/SFC's 256) areas having better specs.

5th Gen: Sony PlayStation (specs and production pipeline), Sega Saturn & Nintendo 64 (build quality)

Best balance of specs for the price, most of the design was done with in-house fabbing and production which helped keep the design simple and cheap allowing for easier reduction of production costs (and thus MSRP to customers) compared to rivals. Although I would say this gets tricky once talking durability: both the N64 and Saturn had better build quality on average than the PS1, meaning the average N64 or Saturn unit would last you longer than the average PS1 before needing to do repairs on it or get a replacement.

6th Gen: Nintendo Gamecube (build quality/ergonomics, most specs (compared to PS2 at least))

Offered better performance in almost every area than PS2 while being more affordable, more durable build quality, smaller (taking up less shelf space), cooler, quieter, and a better controller ergonomically. This might actually be the easiest to pick from gen-wise because tech-wise there were features PS2 lacked that Gamecube and OG Xbox had, meanwhile OG Xbox could not price-reduce in a manageable way due to the Nvidia agreement and the CPU they used wasn't the most power-efficient either (altho it did have some QOL advantages such as a build-in HDD and ethernet by default, which neither Gamecube nor PS2 had without buying extra hardware).

7th Gen: Sony PS3 (build quality/user upgradable options/QOL), Xbox 360 (internal architecture)

Although it had YLOD, that wasn't as big a problem as RROD was for 360. It had built-in Wifi out of the gate (originally you needed a separate module for 360 until Microsoft built it in by default with later revisions starting 2007/2008 IIRC), higher resolution output support (IIRC), more USB options and higher-definition Blu-Ray by default (360 was stuck with DVD).

Again, though, this gets a bit tricky, particularly once looking at internals. 360 had a unified memory pool, better shader support, and a more streamlined architecture overall. It had more than enough power for its time but more importantly the ease-of-use for devs to realize their ambitions sooner rather than later, and that always means a lot. There's a reason Sony took after the 360's design ethos when making the PS4. Speaking of which...

8th Gen: Sony PS4 (overall)

Better GPU, better memory, faster memory bandwidth, snappier OS, easier-to-use OS...this one is probably the overall easiest to decide upon. It also had a smaller footprint than the original XBO, and a PSU that was built into the system itself, while Microsoft was still going with a solution that was already out of fashion even in 2013, let alone today.

8.5 Gen: Xbox One X (overall)

Microsoft did turn the books on Sony with the mid-gen refreshes, though. PS4 Pro was big & bulky, and had some of the worst fan noise of a game console ever. One X ran a lot quieter, and with better build quality/durability to boot.

Current Gen: Series X (ergonomics/build quality), Tie? (PS5/Series X, specs)

I agree with you that in terms of specs/architectural features it's too early to say if either PS5 or Series X is better, however I think overall they'll essentially be tied in that respect. In terms of QOL features, build ergonomics and user features, though, in all ways other than internal storage upgradeability it seems like Series X is the better of the two systems.

That said, it may not STAY that way in the future, because Sony can always make adjustments to expand on OS-level QOL features, and maybe their PS5 refreshes (or a PS5 Pro) has better build quality than the current Series consoles or Microsoft's mid-gen refresh. All the same, if Microsoft addresses the internal storage issue with the proprietary expansion cards by just releasing a m.2-to-CF Express adapter then that solves what could be an issue on their end as time goes on.
This is a great read and the best answer I've heard so far.
 
Jan 14, 2018
5,583
7,106
805
7th Gen:

Wii
Xbox 360
PS3

I say the 360. Released a year ahead of it's contemporaries and was the best third party machine due to development ease and amazing capabilities. Also, the best online console to date by far.
Different opinions, but in this part I do not agree.


What is the case that Xbox 360 was easier to develop, if its quality hardware was crap, remember the light of death, that and that the optical reader damaged the physical format of the game.

For me, this generation with PS3 and Wii, was not only the worst in the history of video games, but a great decline in hardware as well .... Fortunately, this generation is already in the past.

And the worst console that i play in my life... the answer is... Xbox 360.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Phunkydiabetic

01011001

Member
Dec 4, 2018
8,277
12,925
650
NES
SNES
N64
GC
360
PS4
XboxSeriesX
*but Switch's form factor was ultimately the best and most lucrative idea

I agree with all of that... EXCEPT N64... that hardware had such extreme bottlenecks it is ridiculous and is the reason less than 5% of all the games on it are 60fps, while 60fps was a common thing on PS1.

while it had the better 3D GPU it also was held back by basically EVERYTHING else

also you can't call the N64 the best designed system of its gen when the hardware was literally the reason Capcom and many others almost completely jumped ship and went with Sony for that gen as the main system to develop on
 
Last edited:

Sid Of Bee

Member
Mar 6, 2018
230
255
305
Different opinions, but in this part I do not agree.


What is the case that Xbox 360 was easier to develop, if its quality hardware was crap, remember the light of death, that and that the optical reader damaged the physical format of the game.

For me, this generation with PS3 and Wii, was not only the worst in the history of video games, but a great decline in hardware as well .... Fortunately, this generation is already in the past.

And the worst console that i play in my life... the answer is... Xbox 360.
Okay so what was the best engineered? I'm sorry for your experiences. I didn't have the same even though I had a launch model as well as two other models and played the 360 a ton.
 
Last edited:
Jan 14, 2018
5,583
7,106
805
I agree with all of that... EXCEPT N64... that hardware had such extreme bottlenecks it is ridiculous and si the reason less than 5% of all the games on it are 60fps, while 60fps was a common thing on PS1.

while it had the better 3D GPU it also was held back by basically EVERYTHING else
Yep... N64... Another crap console... only Nintendo and RARE games were are the exception.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Member
Dec 4, 2018
8,277
12,925
650
Yep... N64... Another crap console... only Nintendo and RARE games were are the exception.

there were a few good third party titles like Chameleon Twist on there too, but yeah...
also I am one of the few people who actually like Castlevania 64 :pie_roffles: the soundtrack and atmosphere are so good
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Heimdall_Xtreme

Sgt.Asher

Member
Jul 18, 2020
313
473
250
Starting with 6th
Gamecube, good power in a small form factor.

7th
Og ps3, needlessly complicated but I like it.

8th
Wii U, only for that streaming tech. I wish i could get that for my pc.

9th
Switch so far. Strangely i like the xbox more than ps5, i think it's the more simple look.