Poll of the Day > Least favorite Nintendo console

(+) Yeah! (+)

was going to say wii, but skyward sword and the two mario galaxies are some of my favorite games, period. so yeah, my answer is wii u, ok?
---

faramir77 posted...

Miroku_of_Nite1 posted...

not__shawn__z posted...

Who the fuck voted for N64 and GC when Wii u exists??

The N64 marked the decline of third party support for Nintendo. The GC affirmed it.

Dead serious, I can't name a Nintendo console with better third party support than the GameCube.

NES and SNES.
---

Yeah, the SNES was the last time Nintendo had a "go-to" console where you could expect to see just about everything come out on it. GameCube wasn't like that. The only way you could argue it was better was just that the games were better overall, but it certainly wasn't the best relative to the competitors at the time.

I like plenty of NES games, but imo its best don't even compare to the best of the rest of the consoles on that list. It's easily my least favorite.

Probably the Switch, not that its bad, its just still in its infancy
---

GanonsSpirit posted...

Virtual Boy.

This. But out of those listed, Wii or Wii U.
---

Hyyr posted...

AllstarSniper32 posted...

N64 will always get my vote as the worse Nintendo console.

As a RPG fan, I had no real reason to purchase a N64. The decision by Nintendo to go with cartridges instead of optical discs ultimately doomed the console IMHO.

The other thing that doomed the console was how arrogant Nintendo was after the success of the SNES and NES. They were very tough to work with as 3rd party development and put up a lot of ridiculous arbitrary rules for those developers that hurt their bottom line. Those companies were looking for other options before the N64 even hit the street.

Yes the PS1 being on CD was a big boon but quite a few 3rd party companies had one foot out the door before the N64 even announced it was a cart based platform.
---

There should be an option for "EVERY stupid version of the DS". It actively ruined handheld gaming, by being more popular than PSP/Vita and making the stylus MANDATORY for a TON of games. If all those crappy versions of the DS didn't exist, the Vita would have gotten the attention it deserved. Thankfully, the PSP was popular enough on it's own to survive with a bunch of rad exclusives, but Nintendo and it's obsessive fans absolutely killed the Vita.
---

I didn't include handhelds because some people just dislike handhelds on principle. Also, backwards compatibility renders some of them basically useless, though I kind of doubt that the original GB or DS would have gotten a lot of votes despite having BC successors.

Wii U sucked- not enough killer games and its lifespan was short- I hope Nintendo learns not to ride success of the big name- it screwed them over hard.

WarGreymon77 posted...

faramir77 posted...

Miroku_of_Nite1 posted...

not__shawn__z posted...

Who the fuck voted for N64 and GC when Wii u exists??

The N64 marked the decline of third party support for Nintendo. The GC affirmed it.

Dead serious, I can't name a Nintendo console with better third party support than the GameCube.

NES and SNES.

Beat me to it. Especially the NES, it pretty much had a near monopoly on the market until the Genesis launched. From '85-'89 (in the U.S.) if you wanted to make a home console game, you made it on the NES for the most part.

orbasm posted...

There should be an option for "EVERY stupid version of the DS". It actively ruined handheld gaming, by being more popular than PSP/Vita and making the stylus MANDATORY for a TON of games. If all those crappy versions of the DS didn't exist, the Vita would have gotten the attention it deserved. Thankfully, the PSP was popular enough on it's own to survive with a bunch of rad exclusives, but Nintendo and it's obsessive fans absolutely killed the Vita.

The Vita was hurt right out the gate by the extremely expensive memory cards in comparison to comparable sized Micro SD cards. I was willing to pay that price for those memory cards, but plenty were pissed at Sony for those prices and refused to buy the Vita.
---

I'm not even sure that the 3DS killed the Vita on its own. It was a big blow to it for sure, but I'd argue that a big part of its failure was due to phones and tablets. I hate to say it, but mobile gaming is bigger than handheld gaming such as on 3DS and Vita. Let's pretend it's 2012, when the Vita launched. Why spend $250 at launch for a Vita when an iPhone can also play games? It's easier for us gamers to justify that than the average Joe that feels he'll be just as happy playing Angry Birds for 99 cents as he would Uncharted for $40/$50 while he waits for a bus. If that person is a gamer, a 3DS had more support and a cheaper price. I'd say there was no room in the market for multiple handhelds because iPhone and Android were and still are competing against the handhelds we love so much.

Oh, and the memory cards? That's just an extra for why the Vita failed. Sony and others had been successful with proprietary accessories in the past, but people don't like it and by the time the Vita was released, SD and microSD were already considered standards. By 2012, we moved beyond having a ton of memory card formats. That said, ultimately, it's part of why people didn't like the Vita, but I don't think that's why it failed. It failed because casual gamers felt fine with their phones and tablets, and the market isn't big enough for two systems; at least, not if one is much more expensive than the other.
---

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

WarGreymon77 posted...

faramir77 posted...

Miroku_of_Nite1 posted...

not__shawn__z posted...

Who the fuck voted for N64 and GC when Wii u exists??

The N64 marked the decline of third party support for Nintendo. The GC affirmed it.

Dead serious, I can't name a Nintendo console with better third party support than the GameCube.

NES and SNES.

Beat me to it. Especially the NES, it pretty much had a near monopoly on the market until the Genesis launched. From '85-'89 (in the U.S.) if you wanted to make a home console game, you made it on the NES for the most part.

Probably an age thing that led to the ignorance of the post two quotes up.

On topic, I voted for the Wii. I bought one due to extreme boredom one weekend with twilight princess and never finished it because I hated the controls so much. The Wii didn't have any other appealing games so it went back into the box and never came back out.

It is fun to see all the people here saying "Nintendo is dead!" and "Nintendo is back on top!" Every other console generation.
---

TBH, I have loved my Wii U and Wii as Virtual libraries, and they combined with the Gamecube era contain a lot of my favorite games. I also grew up on NES and N64, but it might be between the two as my least favorite. SNES is one of my favorite libraries. Might have to be NES honestly, even though Super Mario Bros 3 and Kirby's Adventures are two of my favorite games!
---

I voted Wii. Although the motion control gimmick was fun at first, it got boring pretty fast. Sure there were some good games but I just felt they could have been better if the motion was dropped. The Wii U, though had a bad run and low amount of games, I felt had a better selection and had great exclusives like Mario Maker and other games which really used the two screen function intuitively (like ZombieU). the SNES/N64 were my favorites, and the Switch is quickly becoming my favorite as well.

Zachnorn posted...

I'm not even sure that the 3DS killed the Vita on its own.

No, Sony took care of that by abandoning it shortly after releasing it, but third-party developers took up the slack, so, if you enjoy JRPGs and VNs, it remains a choice system. ... But, as far as casual players are concerned, it never really existed.
---

adjl posted...

The WiiU's kind of a tricky one to assess. Objectively, the library was small. Probably too small, really. It did have some absolutely delightful gems in there, though, and it worked phenomenally well as a companion system to a gaming PC.

This, which is why I got my vote for worst one. The touch screen was also underutilized. Some games like Xenoblade X probably wouldn't be doable without it, and I did use it for "portable" gaming for a few times, but it wasn't a ground breaker.

And just checked, I already have half the games on the Switch as I bought for the WiiU (although, I did end up getting a lot of VC stuff via Humble Bundles, like Shantae and Affordable Space Adventures. But still).
---

Out of those systems I play Nes least. Then N64.

GanonsSpirit posted...

Virtual Boy.

Shockingly, the Virtual Boy is considered a portable!

^ Well, it WAS advertised as being portable:
http://www.8-bitcentral.com/images/nintendo/promo/virtualBoy/virtualBoy_1b.jpg
---

orbasm posted...

There should be an option for "EVERY stupid version of the DS". It actively ruined handheld gaming, by being more popular than PSP/Vita and making the stylus MANDATORY for a TON of games. If all those crappy versions of the DS didn't exist, the Vita would have gotten the attention it deserved. Thankfully, the PSP was popular enough on it's own to survive with a bunch of rad exclusives, but Nintendo and it's obsessive fans absolutely killed the Vita.

Dude, no. Sony is the reason the Vita failed.
---

n64 had 2 to 3 great game a year (game of the year contenders). but i felt like playstation at the time was releasing a great game every month with new ideas and designs with fmv and voice acting (cinematic experinces). That's why i had to vote for n64 compared to the other. it was the start of the fall of Nintendo. NES and SNES was a fantastic machine and N64 didn't come close to how awesome it was. All the worlds on the N64 felt too empty with fog and had blocking controls. For example, Mario Kart lanes where way to wide for compared to any racing game. it felt unneeded and a less of a challege to get around objects and corners.

Now really thinking about it i want to take it back and vote for the wii. But i'm still angry on how i was let down on the n64.
---

i feel like the vita failed because sony doesn't know how to make games. I know that's harsh to say. But they have no really phenomenal 1st party studios like nintendo or they don't have a system seller franchise like nintendo does.

I feel like they let there subsidiary studios run themselves and let them make the games they want. if Sony does push for a game to be made for their system, you get Uncharted of the vita or Killzone for the vita. Which aren't bad games, but they aren't system seller or household titles for all markets. Sure there is little big planet, but compare it the mario franchise.
---

I voted NES, although I haven't played anything on the Wii U or switch.
---

ernieforss posted...

i feel like the vita failed because sony doesn't know how to make games.

That's one reason. That goes hand in hand with the lack of first party support. Then there's the lack of marketing, the over-the-top security measures, the unnecessarily expensive memory cards that presented a formidable barrier of entry, and just general lack of faith. In NA they even removed its name from the PSTV (originally called the Vita TV, primarily designed to play Vita games on TV).
---

Probably the Wii or N64 (granted, I never really had an N64 but I played N64's by friends).
---

SNES > Gamecube > N64 > NES > Wii > Switch > Wii U

SNES was a masterpiece - in my opinion the greatest console ever made. It has some seminal gems (Chrono Trigger, Super Metroid, the Mega Man X trilogy, the DKC trilogy...) and a good chunk of its library still holds up well today. An all around amazing console that really laid the groundwork for what gaming would become.

The Gamecube was, in my opinion, a criminally underrated system. It had a bevy of absolutely fantastic (and frequently underappreciated) games on it - Metroid Prime and its sequel, F-Zero GX (greatest racing game ever), Baten Kaitos, Pikmin, SSBM. And it also became the landing pad for a lot of Dreamcast games (another console that never got the love it deserved) in the form of the Sonic Adventure games, Phantasy Star Online, Skies of Arcadia... honestly, the GC deserved a lot more recognition than it got.

The N64 is always hard for me to rate. It has some of the greatest games of all time in its library (both Zelda titles, Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie...) and a lot of really, really fun titles, but aside from those a lot of its library has not aged well and it really shows a lot of the early flaws of the 3D era.

Despite the retro-love it gets, my opinion of the NES is similar to that I have of the N64. While it was amazing at the time, a lot of its entries have not aged well and some are borderline unplayable. While the system hosts a lot of gaming's classic entries and games like Bubble Bobble and Balloon Fighter remain fun to this day, a lot of what it did has since been done a lot better.

I feel like the Wii suffers from the biggest hatedom of Nintendo's consoles and it really wasn't that bad of a system. The motion control mechanic was fun when used properly (admittedly, some games tried to shoehorn it in and did so badly) and it had some really fun titles if you were willing to look for them (Twilight Princess, Muramasa, Sonic Colours, Mario Galaxy). It was probably the greatest multiplayer Nintendo console ever - games like Wii Sports, WarioWare, and Mario Party were a blast to pull out even if non-gamers were in attendance.

I don't have too much to say on the Switch because it's so new, so it almost feels unfair to stick it in this rating. A lot of why I have it so low is just because it doesn't have much of a library yet, but we'll see how it fares in a few years.

The Wii U was a definite misstep. The gimmick was poorly utilized and didn't work (despite the promise that things like Nintendo Land showed), it got very low support, and despite the presence of a couple of gems there really wasn't much on the console worth getting excited about. Easily Nintendo's weakest home console to date.
---

Zachnorn posted...

I'm not even sure that the 3DS killed the Vita on its own. It was a big blow to it for sure, but I'd argue that a big part of its failure was due to phones and tablets. I hate to say it, but mobile gaming is bigger than handheld gaming such as on 3DS and Vita. Let's pretend it's 2012, when the Vita launched. Why spend $250 at launch for a Vita when an iPhone can also play games? It's easier for us gamers to justify that than the average Joe that feels he'll be just as happy playing Angry Birds for 99 cents as he would Uncharted for $40/$50 while he waits for a bus. If that person is a gamer, a 3DS had more support and a cheaper price. I'd say there was no room in the market for multiple handhelds because iPhone and Android were and still are competing against the handhelds we love so much.

Oh, and the memory cards? That's just an extra for why the Vita failed. Sony and others had been successful with proprietary accessories in the past, but people don't like it and by the time the Vita was released, SD and microSD were already considered standards. By 2012, we moved beyond having a ton of memory card formats. That said, ultimately, it's part of why people didn't like the Vita, but I don't think that's why it failed. It failed because casual gamers felt fine with their phones and tablets, and the market isn't big enough for two systems; at least, not if one is much more expensive than the other.

This is probably the smartest reasoning I've ever heard about why the Vita was unsuccessful. Ios/Android phones being able to play games decimated the handheld gaming market, that's probably why Nintendo kept making all the newer DS models backwards compatible (probably the ONLY good thing I'll EVER say about the DS series). I'm honestly just salty, the Vita is SUCH a better console than every DS combined, but people would rather get a cheaper system with cheaper looking games, than buy a premium product with fancy screen and way better controls. 3DS games that come out TODAY still look like sub-PSP era games, i find it completely absurd. Luckily 3rd party and Japanese developer support is somehow keeping the Vita alive, there are literally more Vita games coming out than PS3 games, by A LOT and that's rad.
---

^Don't hate the player, hate the game. If power was everything, we wouldn't be playing handhelds in the first place.
---

keyblader1985 posted...

^Don't hate the player, hate the game. If power was everything, we wouldn't be playing handhelds in the first place.

Plus, the most powerful system of a generation doesn't always win.
See these sales winners:
NES (Master is more powerful)
PS1 (N64 and Saturn are more powerful)
PS2 (GameCube and Xbox are more powerful)
Wii (Xbox 360 and PS3 are more powerful)
Every handheld made by Nintendo since Game Boy (beat by Game Gear, N-Gage, PSP, PS Vita, etc.)
---

The switch gave me buyer's remore, there's nothing interesting on this thing. I can play any stand alone mario/zelda game and get the same satisfaction, so whatever to the newer one. I'm hoping Bayo 3 makes dropping $300 worth it.
---

MidnyteBlaze posted...

The switch gave me buyer's remore, there's nothing interesting on this thing. I can play any stand alone mario/zelda game and get the same satisfaction, so whatever to the newer one. I'm hoping Bayo 3 makes dropping $300 worth it.

This freaking guy.

Also, what does "stand alone" Mario/Zelda mean? Like one you can enjoy without playing other games in the series? That's how those series have always been, and BotW and Odyssey are no exceptions.

Power is NOT everything, you're both right, but to me, personally, DS-3DS games have always looked like absolute trash. Kirby Triple Deluxe, Kirby Planet Robobot, and the Mario games, are literally the ONLY things that look anything close to what modern games should look like on a handheld. Meanwhile, Vita has games that almost look like PS3 games: Killzone: Mercenary, every Neptunia game, Odin Sphere remastered, Shantae Half-Genie Hero, Freedom Wars, Drive Girls, etc..
---

orbasm posted...

There should be an option for "EVERY stupid version of the DS". It actively ruined handheld gaming, by being more popular than PSP/Vita and making the stylus MANDATORY for a TON of games. If all those crappy versions of the DS didn't exist, the Vita would have gotten the attention it deserved. Thankfully, the PSP was popular enough on it's own to survive with a bunch of rad exclusives, but Nintendo and it's obsessive fans absolutely killed the Vita.

The PSP was garbage no matter what and the only person you should blame for the Vita failing is Sony and would-be Vita fans. If the PSP hadn't existed, the Vita *might* have been able to make a go of it -- since the PSP burned out much of Sony's good will and momentum -- but even then it was overpriced hardware that few people were interested in.

And complaining that your chosen handheld can't survive competition just makes it look even sadder and more pathetic. Sony did a piss-poor job with handhelds which is why they couldn't make much headway.

SteamedHams posted...

I didn't include handhelds because some people just dislike handhelds on principle. Also, backwards compatibility renders some of them basically useless, though I kind of doubt that the original GB or DS would have gotten a lot of votes despite having BC successors.

tbh, I generally prefer handhelds these days. And, amusingly enough, the GB's library probably had far fewer duds than the NES's.
---

orbasm posted...

Zachnorn posted...

I'm not even sure that the 3DS killed the Vita on its own. It was a big blow to it for sure, but I'd argue that a big part of its failure was due to phones and tablets. I hate to say it, but mobile gaming is bigger than handheld gaming such as on 3DS and Vita. Let's pretend it's 2012, when the Vita launched. Why spend $250 at launch for a Vita when an iPhone can also play games? It's easier for us gamers to justify that than the average Joe that feels he'll be just as happy playing Angry Birds for 99 cents as he would Uncharted for $40/$50 while he waits for a bus. If that person is a gamer, a 3DS had more support and a cheaper price. I'd say there was no room in the market for multiple handhelds because iPhone and Android were and still are competing against the handhelds we love so much.

Oh, and the memory cards? That's just an extra for why the Vita failed. Sony and others had been successful with proprietary accessories in the past, but people don't like it and by the time the Vita was released, SD and microSD were already considered standards. By 2012, we moved beyond having a ton of memory card formats. That said, ultimately, it's part of why people didn't like the Vita, but I don't think that's why it failed. It failed because casual gamers felt fine with their phones and tablets, and the market isn't big enough for two systems; at least, not if one is much more expensive than the other.

This is probably the smartest reasoning I've ever heard about why the Vita was unsuccessful. Ios/Android phones being able to play games decimated the handheld gaming market, that's probably why Nintendo kept making all the newer DS models backwards compatible (probably the ONLY good thing I'll EVER say about the DS series). I'm honestly just salty, the Vita is SUCH a better console than every DS combined, but people would rather get a cheaper system with cheaper looking games, than buy a premium product with fancy screen and way better controls. 3DS games that come out TODAY still look like sub-PSP era games, i find it completely absurd. Luckily 3rd party and Japanese developer support is somehow keeping the Vita alive, there are literally more Vita games coming out than PS3 games, by A LOT and that's rad.

Smartphone and tablet adoption wouldn't be a killer for the PSP and Vita if Sony hadn't massively overpriced their poorly functioning garbage. The PSP was poorly designed, with inexcusable load-times and issues resulting from the downright moronic idea of using UMDs (a mistake they finally corrected with the Vita). Contrary to pundits who have been claiming it for close to a decade now, the handheld market clearly hasn't been made obsolete by smartphones, etc, because the DS and 3DS have continued to sell.

The PSP and Vita were inferior systems. Their pricing -- and hidden costs -- only hurt them further. And while Sony fanboys played up the graphics, most of the games didn't even look good. A lot of PSP games were inferior to some of the things being done on the DS. So despite the terrible load-times, shitty controls, etc, you didn't even always have improved graphics to show for it.

orbasm posted...

Power is NOT everything, you're both right, but to me, personally, DS-3DS games have always looked like absolute trash. Kirby Triple Deluxe, Kirby Planet Robobot, and the Mario games, are literally the ONLY things that look anything close to what modern games should look like on a handheld. Meanwhile, Vita has games that almost look like PS3 games: Killzone: Mercenary, every Neptunia game, Odin Sphere remastered, Shantae Half-Genie Hero, Freedom Wars, Drive Girls, etc..

I'm still not sure if it's a case of you being delusional or just flat-out clueless. None of the games you listed are among the 3DS's most visually advanced and, more importantly, they demonstrate style over graphics.
---

Lmao there are NO DS games that look better than what a PSP could do. Look at both hand-held Assassin's Creed games that came out around the same time. The DS version looks like a creepy N64 game, and the PSP version looks like a early-to-mid era PS2 game.
---

orbasm posted...

Lmao there are NO DS games that look better than what a PSP could do.

It's not about what a PSP *could* do, it was about what a PSP actually did. They produced a lot of low-end ps1 quality titles which looked like shit even compared to the DS's more N64 standard.

orbasm posted...

Look at both hand-held Assassin's Creed games that came out around the same time. The DS version looks like a creepy N64 game, and the PSP version looks like a early-to-mid era PS2 game.

Overlooking that the two weren't even designed the same, lolwut? The PSP AssCreed looks like a mid-era ps1 game.

https://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/gamespot/images/2009/320/reviews/1076809-958338_20091117_001.jpg

The problem with the DS version is that they didn't bother putting any effort into it. As a result, it looked like some GBA games but that's completely the fault of the developer. If your point was that a developer could do a half-assed job, you've made your point. However, even DS games which came out before it looked better than that. And most PSP games looked strictly worse than the PSP version. And that's not even counting issues like load-time. The PSP was a conceptual nightmare. It failed to keep a customer base despite strong third-party support because it was poorly designed.
---

I can't decide which Wii is worse, but ultimately I went with the original for its awkward controllers and the fact that the damn thing ran at 480p in an era where 1080p TVs were already becoming commonplace.
---

Definitely the N64 for me. I got it as a kid and was very jealous of my PS1 owning friends. It had a few classics and I had a lot of good times playing it but overall it was pretty disappointing to me. Didn't vote for the WiiU because I never owned one.
---