LogFAQs > #880825971

Raganork10 posted...

30% of the list consists of 3D platformers. More platformers are represented than any other genre. Nearly 1 out of 3 of the best selling games were platformers. That is not insignificant.

30% of the 1-10, iirc 20% or less of the 1-20.

Raganork10 posted...

Also, compare a list of 3D platformers on the system with every other genre. See how many platformers you recognize in comparison to everything else, and try not to be pedantic. Even PO, master nitpicker extraordinaire, can see how the console was overwhelming with platformers.

Most consoles were "overwhelming" with platformers at the time. It was a popular time for platformers.

Raganork10 posted...

Anything that was ever considered good on the system has had better entries released either before or since the N64. The only way you'd ever prefer playing N64 games these days is if you were wearing extra thick prescription nostalgia glasses. It's a system that has aged poorly and has a terrible controller to make playing these terrible games an exercise in frustration and annoyance. Maybe when everyone sprouts extra hands like Hindu Gods, the controller would be less cumbersome to wield. Maybe if nuclear bombs dropped in 1996 to create a Fallout-esque post apocalyptic world, where everything is rooted in 90s culture and themes, the games would still be enjoyable.

That's a fairly broad and entirely subjective statement. If we're talking series, a lot of series had their last great entry on the N64. In general, though, I find the premise absurd. For instance, noting that FF6 (a SNES game) was better than FF7 (a ps1 game) doesn't invalidate FF7 or reflect badly on the ps1. Likewise, LttP was better than OoT but OoT is still reasonably good. Of course, the N64 was the first and last time that a Bond game really got big although later titles might have been better.

That's also keeping in mind that SM64 was the first and maybe last truly stellar 3D Mario. Sunshine was a flop and SMG was a mixed bag. And SM64 is wholly superior to the SM64DS port, and I hope that it'll someday get a 3DS port so I don't need to crack out my N64 whenever I want to play it.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Which doesn't actually matter, because the post I was replying to said "it did quite well". And I pointed out that it did third place out of four, while the fourth was basically a lame horse that got shot halfway through the race.

Which, again, is a matter of popularity not quality nor a particularly good metric for anything. Popularity is not and should never used as a surrogate for quality.

And, on a more general level, if you come in third place in a three-person race against Usain Bolt and Tyson Gay, that doesn't necessarily mean that you're slow or a shit runner.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Or, granted, if we went by the metric of "Nintendo cheaps out on hardware so they're the only ones who turn a profit off console sales as opposed to taking the loss and hoping for software success", then yes, they probably DID do well. But the financial success of Nintendo as a company shouldn't actually mean anything to a gamer (in the same sense that movie-goers shouldn't judge the quality of a movie on how much profit it made for the studio).

Except for the fact that the ps2 was by far the weakest system of its generation so, if anybody cut corners, it was Sony. In fact, the ps2 was even weaker than the DC iirc.
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash