Games Consoles Tier List

[Zkirsche]

I think the N64 should go up. OoT, SM64, Pokemon Snap,superman 64 and the very first SSB all were on that console.

Also, while I know the PS2 and PS have a good variety of games, so does the 360, and I think Gears + Halo > whatever PS has.

[Phoenix Wright]

Obviously. But should we rate consoles lower just because they came out 25 years ago when technology was a pittance compared with today? My point is that your tiering criteria is flawed. I'm arguing against a tiering criteria that looks only at raw power and flashiness of the console. Obviously, if the NES came out today, it'd be bottom tier, no questions asked. And just because a Wii can emulate a NES doesn't make the Wii automatically better. If it does to you, so be it. But I will argue against your rating system as long as it takes.

The tier list is based on the here and now. As I said before, the tier list is one with time, and so changes as time progresses.

Even if the SNES did have the best heyday, it wouldn't be above the PS2.

Based on this quote, the NES needs to be moved down.

My opinion is not flawed. It is not based on the flashiness of the console, but it is based on raw power. I'd rather have a Wii over an NES because I can play the NES on the Wii, thus making it better. I can flip it and say "just because the NES was more important does not automatically make it better."

It is obvious that the NES holds its own spot in your feelings toward this, but from a logical standpoint, the NES is a hunk of garbage to today's standards. And, since this is Raven's list, we must abide by his rule of tiering, which is "here and now," so to speak. The NES is not "here and now," it is the grandfather of gaming.

Now, I'm all for a "Legendary Tier," which would consist of Nintendo consoles mostly along with the PSX. But why have that except for the feeling of nostalgia? The NES, SNES, and N64 have no right to being at the top tiers just as the CD-i, Virtual Boy, and Atari 2600 have no right being up their. They're garbage (some I listed were trash then too)in today's society.

@Raven: What is the reasoning for the PS3 not being Awesome Tier?

Edited June 8, 2010 by MGS: Metal Gear Solid

[Raven]

Any reason why the NES is in the Awesome tier, while the the N64, and the SNES are below it. I can't think of any reason why. It needs to go down at least one tier. Plus, the Wii, DS, GBA, etc. can emulate it. There's no reason for it to be so high except for nostalgia MAKING you place it higher. :)

The Nintendo DS must go down a tier. Too many crap games. Terrible Wi-Fi, dumbass friendcodes, pretty much no people near our ages have one, not enough AAA titles. Why is it so high? The DSi Ware barely helps it. Most games are short and get boring after five minutes.

PSX/PS1 needs to go down. As much as I love my own, it's not a great system anymore. Plus, you can get a lot of their good games off of the PS Store! Why is it so high?

PS3 needs to go up, or Xbox360 needs to go down. The PS3 has a BluRay player, virtually unhackable (I see that as a plus), for the most part has much better exclusives (of course, subjective so probably irrelevant), free online (for now), and millions of owners. The Xbox360 has slightly better online. Whoopdie-do. They're both fantastic consoles. There's no reason for the Xbox360 to be higher.

You also forgot to put the PSPGo in "shit tier." Too pricey, only downloadable games, and crappy games in general (about 20 games are actually worthy of owning for most PSP owners).

Seriously, how the fuck are these consoles being rated?

"The tier list is based on the here and now. As I said before, the tier list is one with time, and so changes as time progresses.

Even if the SNES did have the best heyday, it wouldn't be above the PS2."

The way they are right now, I have trouble believing this. Mainly because the NES is so damn high, while the PS3 is too low.

Which is what discussions are for. Nobody has ever said the list is correct, and there will always be someone disagreeing with something.

I put the NES up due to suggestions made early in the thread. It will be dropping once I edit the first post. Suggestions as to where to put it would be appreciated.

PS1 may go down to Top tier. It's not "Awesome" any more, but it will remain in Top.

The DS may well go a bit lower, but it is a unit that is satisfying many people, since its online is great for games like Mario Kart DS, Tetris DS, 42 All-Time Classics... Plus it's free, even if you have to add Friend Codes. You don't need them to go against random people, even if they are anonymous. It has many shit games yeah, but doesn't all consoles have "many shit games"? The only reason DS has so many is because it is so popular, which makes game companies milk the shit out of it, making any and every type of game to sell to unknowing 5 year old girls who want to raise a pony on their DS, while keeping the older gamers satisfied with quality games like Metroid Prime: Hunters, Scribblenauts, and others. Hell, my Grandfather owns and plays his DS Lite literally every day (probably more than he reads the newspaper) because of the puzzle games he owns, ad he despises my 360, PS2 and Wii. DS is not going down a tier, not yet anyway.

The PS3 has got those things that you mentioned, but it can't touch the Live Arcade. The graphics the BluRay provide are hardly noticeable (as people have stated before), even with a top of the range TV and components - which all cost a substantial extra amount of money to utilise the PS3's full power. If the PS3 had majorly superior graphics over the 360, (BluRay has nothing over DVD without the right components, as I said) I would consider the graphics. The 360 also has millions of owners, what's your point? Indeed it's not a big deal that the online is a bit better. The PS3's ability to play Blu-Ray over the 360's DVD player is equivalent to the 360's slightly better online over the PS3's. Whoopdie-do indeed.

PSPGo is part of PSP right now, but if the games it can play are only downloadable and it can't play PSP games, then I can separate them.

Well, I think that that criteria is going to clearly bias everyone in favor of newer consoles, when that shouldn't be the case.

I'll ask a question back to you: Would you rather that the NES not have ever existed, or the Wii/360/PS3 had never existed.

The Tier List is obviously biased towards newer consoles, because they are new. If a new console is a fuck-up for whatever reason, then it will be placed lower than older consoles which are still performing well.

The SNES is being out-performed, and this tier list shows that (or it will, once the NES is moved somewhere below SNES).

Without being offensive or rude: What sort of question is that? It's not relevant to what I had asked you. Either way, I could live without the 360/Wii/PS3 generation because I'd be playing my GameCube and PS2 quite happily.

You have hit the nail on the head with what you have said though, MGS. Where do you suggest the NES be lowered to?

Edit: Reasons for not having the PS3 in Awesome Tier is because of the price it is at. While it's been substantially lowered since its release, it is still expensive compared to the 360. BluRay media isn't cheap either, especially compared to DVDs. The extra price isn't worth the little extra quality BluRay has over DVD.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Raven

[Phoenix Wright]

The PS3 has got those things that you mentioned, but it can't touch the Live Arcade. The graphics the BluRay provide are hardly noticeable (as people have stated before), even with a top of the range TV and components - which all cost a substantial extra amount of money to utilise the PS3's full power. If the PS3 had majorly superior graphics over the 360, (BluRay has nothing over DVD without the right components, as I said) I would consider the graphics. The 360 also has millions of owners, what's your point? Indeed it's not a big deal that the online is a bit better. The PS3's ability to play Blu-Ray over the 360's DVD player is equivalent to the 360's slightly better online over the PS3's. Whoopdie-do indeed.

That is true, but I mentioned the PS3's PSS as a pro, not a con just because the Xbox360's is better. Also, why are you mentioning the BluRay player as a hindrance? It's not like the PS3 can't play DVD's as well.

You haven't given me reason why the Xbox is BETTER. You have only stated why they are practically the same. There is no reasoning behind the Xbox being a better console. So why is the PS3 down a tier?

I think they are very noticeable, by the way, but that isn't the point.

[Zanarkin]

Why is Xbox and wii over ps3?

[Raven]

That is true, but I mentioned the PS3's PSS as a pro, not a con just because the Xbox360's is better. Also, why are you mentioning the BluRay player as a hindrance? It's not like the PS3 can't play DVD's as well.

You haven't given me reason why the Xbox is BETTER. You have only stated why they are practically the same. There is no reasoning behind the Xbox being a better console. So why is the PS3 down a tier?

I think they are very noticeable, by the way, but that isn't the point.

The 360's Live Arcade is something that puts the 360 above the PS3. The 360 also has exclusives which are amazing. The main reasoning behing me purchasing a 360 over a PS3 is because Ace Combat is now exclusive to it, which surprised me since the Ace Combat series was always PS-only until then, excluding Ace Combat Advance, for GBA. The 360 has many great games. The achievement system is also better than the PS3's.

But the deciding factor is the 360's great Live Arcade. If you don't know why it's so great, just do some research into it.

If the PS3 could play PS2 games, then it would probably quite easily top the whole list. It's the biggest let-down of the PS3, since it is fully capable of doing so. Sony are just being assholes about it, since early versions of the PS3 could play both PS1 and PS2 games.

Why is Xbox and wii over ps3?

Why not?

Edited June 8, 2010 by Raven

[Phoenix Wright]

The 360's Live Arcade is something that puts the 360 above the PS3. The 360 also has exclusives which are amazing. The main reasoning behing me purchasing a 360 over a PS3 is because Ace Combat is now exclusive to it, which surprised me since the Ace Combat series was always PS-only until then, excluding Ace Combat Advance, for GBA. The 360 has many great games. The achievement system is also better than the PS3's.

But the deciding factor is the 360's great Live Arcade. If you don't know why it's so great, just do some research into it.

If the PS3 could play PS2 games, then it would probably quite easily top the whole list. It's the biggest let-down of the PS3, since it is fully capable of doing so. Sony are just being assholes about it, since early versions of the PS3 could play both PS1 and PS2 games.

Then what is your reasoning for everything else in Awesome tier being better than the PS3 if the deciding factor was the Live Arcade? By that logic, all those other consoles are even better than the Xbox360 because they would all need something better than its Live Arcade in order to top it.

The Live Arcade SHOULD NEVER be a deciding factor in determining the Xbox360 is better than the PS3. Not everyone has money to blow on the Arcade, just like the PSS.

For the time being, your list makes no sense (for the top two tiers anyway). Somehow the NDS outshines the PS3, but not the 360 because of it's shop? What the hell?

[Raven]

Based on some of your comments and other posts by others, I've edited the tier list, but PS3 is still below 360 for now, until I'm convinced that the PS3 is genuinely the better system.

I've also moved NES dooown, moved GameCube and N64 up, and PS1 down.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Raven

[Zanarkin]

Why not?

Don't get me wrong, the wii is a fun system, but many games are just such a let downplus the online is ridiculous(sp?) in many games. No leader board, no headset (I find i prefer privacy when talking with people others don't know. Plus i don't want people to know what i'm talking about if i'm talking to some else. The wii speak does not cover this.) And also no downloadable content. The wii shop is cool and all but it doesn't take the wii above PS3.

After reading the thing about Xbox in your post, the only thing i have to back up is the monthly payment for membership which i think is ridiculous contrary to popular belief.

Seems like i was a bit late about the wii oh well

Edited June 8, 2010 by Ulki

[Phoenix Wright]

Based on some of your comments and other posts by others, I've edited the tier list, but PS3 is still above 360 for now, until I'm convinced that the PS3 is genuinely the better system.

I've also moved NES dooown, moved GameCube and N64 up, and PS1 down.

Personally, even I don't think the PS3 is better, so that'll probably never be argued.

Edited June 8, 2010 by MGS: Metal Gear Solid

[Raven]

Don't get me wrong, the wii is a fun system, but many games are just such a let downplus the online is ridiculous(sp?) in many games. No leader board, no headset (I find i prefer privacy when talking with people others don't know. Plus i don't want people to know what i'm talking about if i'm talking to some else. The wii speak does not cover this.) And also no downloadable content. The wii shop is cool and all but it doesn't take the wii above PS3.

After reading the thing about Xbox in your post, the only thing i have to back up is the monthly payment for membership which i think is ridiculous contrary to popular belief.

I've made some updates to the list, resulting in the PS3 above the Wii, but not above the 360. The 360's Gold Account is something like £5 a month or £10 for 3 months (thanks eBay), but the free content available is great. 1 vs 100 is a great example of awesome free content. It's much more of a community console than that of the PS3, which is a good plus.

[Zkirsche]

Why GC > N64?

Also, why the large gap between the Atari 2600 and the NES? I can see NES > 2600, but by 2 tiers? The games on the 2600 may be basic, but they're still fun to play (well, the good ones anyway).

the NES is a hunk of garbage to today's standards.

Graphics are not everything. The old NES games were, and many still are, some of the most fun games to play sheerly because of their difficulty.

[The Envoy of the Beginning]

Graphics are not everything. The old NES games were, and many still are, some of the most fun games to play sheerly because of their difficulty.

Assumption much?

Anyways, the Gamecube has Super Smash Bros. Melee, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, FE:PoR, Wind Waker, Sonic Mega Collection, and some other great stuff that can rival what the N64 has. And the N64 is said to have a terrible controller. And this is despite that I had no problem with it, but PEMN.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Black Soldier

[Zkirsche]

Assumption much?

Edit: Forgot about extra's like xbox live arcade.

Anyways, the Gamecube has Super Smash Bros. Melee, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, FE:PoR, Wind Waker, Sonic Mega Collection, and some other great stuff that can rival what the N64 has. And the N64 is said to have a terrible controller. And this is despite that I had no problem with it, but PEMN.

Well, the controllers don't really subtract from the gameplay too much. Mine keeps jerking everywehere and OoT, which is my favourite game of all time, is still perfectly playable.

And to your first first point OoT, SSB, SM64, SMK64 and Doom 64 all want a word with them. Oh and paper mario.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Kirsche

[ReformBlade]

No, you can't. You can acknowledge something has objectively redeeming qualities in construction, but you cannot view a good game as bad, because if you view it as bad, it is necessarily a bad game. Bad and good are mutually exclusive terms. So, you can say "The graphics in this game are good, but it doesn't stop the game from being bad". You cannot (logically) say "(I think) This game is good, but I think this game is bad." It doesn't make sense.

Read my post again. I said I can say a game is good and still hate it. That says nothing about it being bad, and if you assume that, well, you're making an ass out of u and me. Example: I recognize Pokemon as a good franchise on the whole, but I hate how big it is (# of Pokemon), and therefore I don't like it. Am I saying it's all bad? No, but the part important to me is bad. But I digress.

Whoever was complaining about the Wii's titles should re-evaluate their game selection. It has good choices, and if you buy a game without knowing what you're getting, you're kinda just letting yourself down. I know sometimes you don't see the fail coming, but that's how every system is (except back in the day)

[Life]

And to your first first point OoT, SSB, SM64, SMK64 and Doom 64 all want a word with them. Oh and paper mario.

Black Soldier listed these games:

Super Smash Bros. Melee, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, FE:PoR, Wind Waker, Sonic Mega Collection

I'm going to add to this list.

Baten Kaitos 1 & 2

Tales of Symphonia (these three games are pretty much the reason of why I still try to use my Gamecube)

Animal Crossing

Mario Kart Double Dash

Resident 1-4 (especially 4)

Skies of Arcadia Legends

These are just some of the games that made the Gamecube pretty much the best console system for a time.

[AceNoctali]

Don't forget, for the GameCube list :

* The two Pikmin games,

* Medal of Honor Frontlines,

* Metroid Prime,

* Soul Calibur 2,

And if you're in those games, the Splinter Cell series. You can add Metal Gear Solid : The Twin Snakes, and Pokémon Colosseum and Pokémon XD too (personnally I enjoyed those two Pokémon games, especially XD and its move-exclusive Pokés).

======================================

Also, I saw earlier on the thread Soul dissing the Sega CD, implying it has Sonic CD as its only great game. Let me mention a few others gems :

* Dune,

* Eternal Champions : Challenge from the Dark Side,

* Final Fight CD (which was, for a long while, the most faithful and best port of the original arcade game),

* Keio Flying Squadron,

* Lethal Enforcers 1 & 2,

* Lunar 1 & 2,

* Popful Mail,

* Snatcher,

* Space Ace,

* The Terminator (a totally different animal from the Megadrive version, and a much better one to boot)

* Theme Park

And that's without counting the FMV games like Night Trap, Double Switch, or Tomcat Alley, which are to each player's tastes, and slightly improved ports of Megadrive games such as Puggsy, Battle Frenzy, Marko's Magic Football, Mortal Kombat, Mickey Mania, or Powermonger.

I'd like to add Dragon's Lair, Time Gal, and Jurassic Park to that list too, but players can be divided regarding their quality.

In short, my point is that, while the Sega CD has obvious hardware flaws, its game list, while not terribly large, is not made of full shit either.

=====================

BTW, speaking of shit : where is the 32X in the list ? THIS one, on the other hand, should be put in Shit Tier. Really, the only good games on that console are Star Wars, Virtua Racing, Virtua Fighter, Doom, and Knuckles' Chaotix, and it's even more a failure hardware-wise than the Sega CD.

Edited June 8, 2010 by AceNoctali

[frat_tastic]

Also on the GC are Mario Sunshine and Twilight Princess.

Then again, N64 has (in addition to what's been listed) Majora's Mask and Ogre Battle 64.

I don't really know which console I like better. N64 certainly (for me anyway) has the edge in platforming and adventure games, but GC has a better list of RPG's and non-adventuring/platforming games (overall, OB64 is probably my favorite RPG out of any RPG either console has).

[Esau of Isaac]

I see. That is indeed an awesome list (I remember playing Toy Story at my friend's house many a year ago), although I don't think it can quite overtake what important and seemingly legendary titles the SNES has, which have been listed. It is however enough to keep Mega Drive up where it is, which is directly behind the SNES.

I want the tier list to remain within legal boundaries, as I'm sure that running a new OS and an emulator isn't something Sony would like people doing with their PS3's.

So considering what the tier list is based on, NES to be lowered? Any suggestions on where to lower it?

It was perfectly legal and fine with Sony until Linux (one of the early selling points for the system) was taken away through a patch about a month ago.

Read my post again. I said I can say a game is good and still hate it. That says nothing about it being bad, and if you assume that, well, you're making an ass out of u and me.

This is basic Enlish here, man. You cannot hate something good; that's why it's good. You can hate something bad resultant of something good, but it's impossible to not like something good by definition of good being agreeable to oneself. If you hated something good, it would necessarily not be good, but bad.

Example: I recognize Pokemon as a good franchise on the whole, but I hate how big it is (# of Pokemon), and therefore I don't like it. Am I saying it's all bad? No, but the part important to me is bad. But I digress.

So then you hate the franchise, but acknowledge them as good games. Are you capable of understanding the pure separation between simultaneously hating and liking the same thing, here?

Also, I saw earlier on the thread Soul dissing the Sega CD, implying it has Sonic CD as its only great game. Let me mention a few others gems :

* Dune,

* Eternal Champions : Challenge from the Dark Side,

* Final Fight CD (which was, for a long while, the most faithful and best port of the original arcade game),

* Keio Flying Squadron,

* Lethal Enforcers 1 & 2,

* Lunar 1 & 2,

* Popful Mail,

* Snatcher,

* Space Ace,

* The Terminator (a totally different animal from the Megadrive version, and a much better one to boot)

* Theme Park

And that's without counting the FMV games like Night Trap, Double Switch, or Tomcat Alley, which are to each player's tastes, and slightly improved ports of Megadrive games such as Puggsy, Battle Frenzy, Marko's Magic Football, Mortal Kombat, Mickey Mania, or Powermonger.

I'd like to add Dragon's Lair, Time Gal, and Jurassic Park to that list too, but players can be divided regarding their quality.

In short, my point is that, while the Sega CD has obvious hardware flaws, its game list, while not terribly large, is not made of full shit either.

Lunar, man. LUNAR.

[ReformBlade]

This is basic Enlish here, man. You cannot hate something good; that's why it's good. You can hate something bad resultant of something good, but it's impossible to not like something good by definition of good being agreeable to oneself. If you hated something good, it would necessarily not be good, but bad.

So then you hate the franchise, but acknowledge them as good games. Are you capable of understanding the pure separation between simultaneously hating and liking the same thing, here?

Are you shitting me? You're off the deep end, son. Where did I say I hate and like the same things? Again, you're making balls bad assumptions here. I see the game is good, but THIS PART HERE, NOT THE WHOLE THING is bad, making me not want to play it. You are getting so caught up on, well, let's be honest, not a single thing I actually said to the point that it's actually hilarious. I'm done here, sir. You baffle me with your illogicalities.

Anyway, back on topic, why is Dreamcast below the N64? Dreamcast should be above it simply for the online aspect (and pre Hunter's license Phantasy Star Online).

[Colonel M]

Piece of Shit 3 down. The steep price tag alone made it unbearable, and it lacks backward compatibility like Wii and 360. Oh yeah, Blu-Ray is the backup? lol. N64 > Gamecube too. There were much, MUCH more memorable things on N64 than the Gamecube. Period.

[Esau of Isaac]

Are you shitting me? You're off the deep end, son. Where did I say I hate and like the same things? Again, you're making balls bad assumptions here. I see the game is good, but THIS PART HERE, NOT THE WHOLE THING is bad, making me not want to play it.

This is not what you said. You stated, and I quote: "I said I can say a game is good and still hate it. That says nothing about it being bad, and if you assume that, well, you're making an ass out of u and me." This speaks absolutely nothing of inner portions of the title, just hating "it", which would by necessity be the noun you earlier identified as the subject of the statement, THE FUCKING GAME. The fact of the matter is at the end of the day, if you don't want to play something, it is obviously not agreeable to you, and thus is a bad game. If you find qualities that are poor about a title and the rest good, but not good enough for you to play the game, then it's a bad game with redeeming qualities, and not a good game with bad qualities. Because if it were a good game, you would obviously fucking play it.

You are getting so caught up on, well, let's be honest, not a single thing I actually said to the point that it's actually hilarious. I'm done here, sir. You baffle me with your illogicalities.

Please God make the laughter stop.

Piece of Shit 3 down. The steep price tag alone made it unbearable, and it lacks backward compatibility like Wii and 360. Oh yeah, Blu-Ray is the backup? lol. N64 > Gamecube too. There were much, MUCH more memorable things on N64 than the Gamecube. Period.

It's about the same price as a 360 now, hasn't been way more steep for years. Can't argue about the backwards compatibility, though. It certainly has a more functioning library than the Wii, however, which while cheap is probably the worst investment of the three library-wise.

[ReformBlade]

This is not what you said. You stated, and I quote: "I said I can say a game is good and still hate it. That says nothing about it being bad, and if you assume that, well, you're making an ass out of u and me." This speaks absolutely nothing of inner portions of the title, just hating "it", which would by necessity be the noun you earlier identified as the subject of the statement, THE FUCKING GAME. The fact of the matter is at the end of the day, if you don't want to play something, it is obviously not agreeable to you, and thus is a bad game. If you find qualities that are poor about a title and the rest good, but not good enough for you to play the game, then it's a bad game with redeeming qualities, and not a good game with bad qualities. Because if it were a good game, you would obviously fucking play it.

Please God make the laughter stop.

I'd love to live in your little world! Everything is apparently black and white!

[Esau of Isaac]

I'd love to live in your little world! Everything is apparently black and white!

Black and white is how mutually exclusive terms tend to work.

Basic. English.

[Colonel M]

It's about the same price as a 360 now, hasn't been way more steep for years.

Not so much now, but the main point was it started at such a ludicrous price tag that it was nothing but "eye candy". The thing is also hoarded with glitches and bugs that weren't resolved prior to its release. XBox360 is also guilty of this, but PS3 has had riskier situations than 360's; another reason for the shitty thing to drop.

Can't argue about the backwards compatibility, though. It certainly has a more functioning library than the Wii, however, which while cheap is probably the worst investment of the three library-wise.

The Wii also can play games that were of the classic era, mostly bragging of having more backward compatibility, per se, than the other 3 systems. I'll grant you Wii was made more for casual players and games like Brawl suck total ass, but let's keep in mind that we get gems like Super Mario Bros., SMRPG, and even Sega classics. The old games is the biggest reason why I thought the Wii was an awesome investment. Most of the games are also < or equal to $10; a price you cannot beat for games nowadays.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Colonel M