My Favourite Titles by System

Every console has that one killer app that defines it. Everybody can remember the one game that sticks out for every system that they have played on, the one game that they played more than any other. For this post I have decided to list some of my most memorable games for each console, the few that, for me, define the very system that they are played on. Expect a lot of subjectivity, a lot of opinion, and a lot of geeking out.

Mega Drive: Sonic the Hedgehog 2

My first introduction to gaming as a medium was through SEGA’s 16-bit effort, the Mega Drive, or as it was named in the States, the SEGA Genesis. One of the first true ‘console wars’ that people can remember was fought between this console and Nintendo’s powerhouse, the SNES. Naturally, the Mega Drive had a powerful influence on me, as it was my first foray into gaming.

The one most impactful game series on this console for me, and I suspect many others, was Sonic the Hedgehog. A platforming blast of speed and bright colours, with a cool blue mascot to boot, Sonic saw his heyday in the Mega Drive era where he was introduced. For me, however, the big game that I played the most with my first ever console was Sonic the Hedgehog 2.

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 was just that bit more colourful, that bit more endearing, and that bit more well-designed than its predecessor. It was the true kind of sequel that all should aspire for; the one that improved and iterated, and genuinely felt like a true improvement over the first game. Graphically, the colours popped more on Sonic’s second outing, leading to greater stage variety and a better sense of identity and adventure to the game. Every stage felt unique and eye-popping, and each one had its own unique flavour that was backed up by excellent musical work. The addition of a spin-dash mechanically added a lot to the game, meaning that players would have a quick way to gather momentum. The addition of a ‘sidekick’ character in Tails was enjoyable, remembering that this was in a time when a new character in a Sonic game was something fresh and interesting.

Even though Sonic 1 may have started the series, and Sonic 3 may be the better game with a better sense of progression and adventure, Sonic 2 hit just the right balance of accessibility to keep me coming back, even to this day.

PS1:

The next console that I was introduced to featured a massive jump from 16-bit, 2D graphics to polygonal 3D that offered bright new worlds that could be fully explored. The PS1 was a great system, especially for a wide variety of bright and enjoyable new titles that pushed the envelope of gaming. Sony can be credited with beginning the popularisation of gaming consoles, and this is in big part thanks to the huge variety of excellent titles on offer. Honourable mentions to Crash Bandicoot, Metal Gear Solid and some excellent Disney titles as well as the legendary Final Fantasy games.

For me, however, the title of most-important game has to go to Spyro 2. As a 3D collect-a-thon platformer, Spyro faced stiff competition from the likes of Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie. The original title, however, was an excellent game that blew me away. The beauty and design of the world on offer was astounding for its time and the collection of gems was addicting. One of the most important things, mechanically, that made this game stand out was the character abilities that came to Spyro. The use of charging was a great way to make quick progress searching a level, and the glide mechanic made for some interesting variants of platforming challenges. The character of Spyro was equal parts attitude and endearing.

For me, once again it was the second title in the series that offered the most fun gameplay. Being one of the very first games that I completed 100%, Spyro 2 holds a large place in my gamer heart. It was set in a bright and fantastic world called Avalar, and boasted a cast of colourful and enjoyable characters. Though Moneybags was somewhat of an annoyance, the overall menagerie of interesting people that I got to meet along the adventure made Spyro 2 stand out in my memory. The music was wonderful as was the design, I truly felt like I was on an adventure in some beautiful locales.

Spyro 2 was one of the first games that I truly became immersed, and as a game I have 100% completed, holds a huge amount of my attention when I think about the PS1 era. Thanks to recent Crash Bandicoot remakes, I am very hopeful that we will see a HD remake of the original Spyro Trilogy; this will definitely be on my Christmas wishlist!

N64: Banjo Kazooie

Though Mario 64 was a masterpiece that brought 3D gaming to the fore, and Ocarina of Time was another stroke of genius that to this day has been hard to top, for me the main game I played a lot on the Nintendo 64 was Banjo Kazooie. A bright, colourful 3D collectathon, this game was endearing in all the right ways. Like Spyro, Banjo comes from a place of design genius, where every locale feels unique and beautiful. Though not a title I played 100% at the time, I have since returned to the game with the Xbox 360 re-release and completed the game in its entirety, with no less enjoyment.

Graphically, Banjo one-upped Mario in every respect, as it did musically and with character designs. Perhaps the peak of 3D platformers, the theming of the title is wonderful. Like Spyro you meet a whole cast of quirky characters along your adventure and delving into each and every level felt like a mini-adventure in its own right, each one being its own sizeable sandbox of experimentation and exploration. Freezeezy Peak is a standout for best winter-themed level of all time.

SEGA Dreamcast: Sonic Adventure

The swansong of SEGA’s console efforts comes along with perhaps the most obvious of picks. Sonic Adventure was the biggest game on the console and the most important release for the system as a whole. I was mesmerised by this game, being a lifelong Sonic fan, and to see my hero rendered in 3D graphics, with full voice acting and a whole storyline was enchanting.

The game didn’t disappoint. Although many look back to Sonic Adventure with a critical eye, I am one of those that find enough nostalgia and enjoyment in the title to consider it one of my favourite games ever. The Casino Night level was among my favourites for the sheer level of interactivity and optional exploration (in particular I loved looking around the pirate ship area), not to mention the fun pinball levels. I particularly enjoyed Tails’ whole storyline; an endearing tale of a young side-kick learning to become independent from the hero he has been following all his life.

Each character in the game had their own tale to tell and this was perhaps what I found most interesting. Though I was essentially playing the game 6 times over, I really enjoyed being able to see each different perspective. In spite of some weak links, such as the Big the Cat segments, overall Sonic Adventure was a treat. A beautiful game with plenty of spectacle and plenty of replayability, with one of the best pet-raising simulators to come out in gaming (everybody loves Chao!).

How Microsoft and Sony could learn from Nintendo

Nintendo may have been slow to embrace new gaming trends in the last couple of generations, but they are undoubtedly a gaming institution. Despite this, there has been some criticism of Nintendo for being slow to learn from other gaming companies. With this in mind, I was wondering what Microsoft and Sony, on the other hand, could learn from Nintendo’s strategy.

The first idea that would undoubtedly benefit Microsoft, especially with the reputation of its online service, is the limitation of online communication. This no doubt is a controversial idea, with this being one of Nintendo’s biggest criticisms, but on the other hand it has also led to a better online community.

Engaging with the Miiverse community is much less toxic than the other multiplayer services. With the general toxicity of gaming as a whole community any attempt at controlling the way in which we engage with one another is sadly the lesser of two evils considering the vileness that can get spewed online.

Another idea that other companies could learn from Nintendo is the value of aesthetics over graphics. While Microsoft and Sony continue to expensively battle over making their boxes render more and more detail that many wouldn’t even notice, on the other hand Nintendo focuses on making its games look beautiful in design rather than through graphical clout. The sheer beauty of the likes of Breath of the Wild and Super Mario 3D World stand as testament to the power of making a game look good on what is considered weak hardware.

The use of colour seems to be the best aspect of a Nintendo game, where, despite reinforcing that annoying ‘kiddy’ image, this results in beautiful, varied locales and games that have a visual identity. On the other hand, the majority of games on Microsoft and Sony consoles seem to be generic shooters with no real visual identity other than brown and grey. In this way, the house of Mario stands ahead of the other two in terms of their visuals, despite their use of under-powered graphics hardware. Microsoft and Sony could do with more effort in making their games look colourful and full of visual charm, rather than gunning for ultra-realism.

The third thing that Microsoft and Sony could learn from Nintendo applies more to Microsoft than to Sony at the moment, with Crash N’Sane Trilogy coming out shortly and the release of WipeOut Omega Collection showing a better intent, it seems that where Microsoft is most lagging behind is in the treatment of its intellectual property.

Nintendo have been accused of focusing too squarely on Mario and Zelda in the past, but undoubtedly the company understands which of its IP have the biggest draws. With further 3DS releases of beloved IP such as Fire Emblem, it seems that Nintendo, as well as Sony, do well with the use of their franchises. Microsoft, on the other hand, seem to have a lack of those killer franchise titles that draw gamers in. Halo 5 was ultimately a disappointment on the Xbox One and other than Gears of War 4 it is difficult to come up with many ‘killer’ apps for the console.

Nintendo may come under fire for a lot of bad decisions, particularly with their being stuck in the past in the online space. However, there are a lot of decisions that are made right with the company, and if it leaves the console race altogether then gaming will be a worse place as a result. As we move forward in gaming, we need to learn lessons from even the console manufacturers we criticise, both in what they do right and in what they do wrong. Nintendo may be mocked and disliked by a lot, but there is no denying that its approach to the console race is interesting.

Asking About Nintendo's Approach

Many gamers are quick to throw disrespect at Nintendo. They are seen as having a ‘kiddy’ public image and suffered a PR disaster in the aftermath of the Wii, due to their embracing of the ‘casual’ market. Many gamers that consider themselves ‘hardcore’, or ‘mature’ have turned their back on the company. There are a lot of gamers that, thanks to the highly-emotional nature of console wars, have called for Nintendo to cease console production and move purely into software, or even to abandon the games industry entirely.

I think that this opinion is jumping to an early conclusion when you consider Nintendo’s position within the industry. Not only that, but losing Nintendo would be a sad thing for every gamer that is interested in the future of gaming.

A lot of people think that Nintendo don’t have the resources to build a powerful gaming machine that can rival Sony and Microsoft. On the other hand, many people also think that they do have the resources, but that it is a foolish decision for Nintendo not to make a graphical powerhouse machine to compete on the same level.

However, this argument is flawed on many of its premises. For one, in financial and resources terms, Nintendo are a huge company. They can easily afford to build a machine that can blow the PS4 and Xbox One out of the water. 

Any PC gamer can attest to the fact that one can cheaply and easily build a rig that can achieve far more than any of these consoles, sometimes even at a cheaper outset than the consoles themselves. 

If they wanted to, Nintendo could build a console that wipes the floor with any machine on the market today, and for that matter, so could Microsoft. Sony I’m not too sure about, given the dire financial straits that they reportedly suffered in the past, but I’m sure they could do so as well given the investment in PSVR and PS4 Pro.

The issue is that such an approach is ultimately futile. It is the nature of consoles that on the day of the release, enthusiast-level PC gamers can build machines that make them look like a joke. All we have right now is an arms-race of ever-higher graphical power, and what is that really achieving? All we’ve gotten is Call of Duty but with more freckles on our characters’ arms. It is not a foolish decision for Nintendo to do away with what really is a futile way of competing with the market.

Fighting on the battlefield of graphics is an exercise in silliness. It is the logical equivalent of those sad arguments we all had as kids between making ever more powerful superheroes that can beat everyone else’s heroes; ‘my guy has a super-everything shield and super-ultra-rays that can smash through your everything shield!’

It is especially futile now that we seem to be approaching the graphical level of diminishing returns. Looking at the pure improvements on offer, I would say that the current generation has achieved very little in terms of extra prettiness. Games certainly do look more polished, sure, but the jump from PS2 to PS3 was a far bigger leap than PS3 to PS4 in graphical terms. It’s gotten to the point that we’re literally splitting hairs; we’re impressed because Lara Croft has a few more strands of hair on one system than on another.

That’s not to say that graphical investment is bad; I love better looking games and some of the stand outs of this generation look simply gorgeous. But most gamers understand and live by the motto of ‘graphics don’t matter’. I personally believe that it is art design, not the graphics that makes a game look beautiful. Some of the Wii U games look astonishing; I dare you not to be charmed by the bombastic show of colours that is Mario Kart 8. What is more important is not the sheer horsepower under the hood but how you use that horsepower to achieve a beautiful result.

However, when we consider Nintendo’s situation, we should really understand what it would mean to make a ‘graphical’ console. It would be making a statement that they intend to compete on the level of Sony and Microsoft. Ultimately, these consoles become mass-market machines. This market includes Fifa, Call of Duty, Assassin’s Creed and more; the big third-party titles that bring in the billions. Nintendo would be making a statement that its selling point was now exactly the same as the other consoles.

But is this a good idea, really? As much as there have been third-party games that have published on Nintendo platforms, how successful have they been in the past? How confident are we that third party developers would, given they have no obligations to, throw their weight behind Nintendo, given their sometimes-shaky relationship with the company in the past? My guess is that if the past is any indication, Nintendo simply cannot afford to rely on that kind of investment.

Not only that, but is that what we need as an industry? Do we need another company to sell us Call of Duty on a new machine with more graphical detail, with more fish that move away from us as we swim to them? I remember there being a massive call not long ago about innovation in gaming.

Like it or not, Nintendo is a company that asks questions. Why do we need to use controllers? Why should we have to stop gaming when the TV is turned off? Why do we need just one screen on a portable device?

I hate to use the word ‘innovative’ in reference to Nintendo because it is a tired argument, but perhaps there is a reason it is a tired argument with regards to Nintendo’s strategy. I think that what Nintendo is trying to do is a hell of a lot more healthy than what other companies are trying to do in the gaming industry. Ultimately, what I feel about Nintendo is that they are trying to bring better ways to engage with gaming, rather than just running through the motions.

We need companies that ask questions, and come up with answers that nobody asked for. We need companies that feel comfortable making Wii U’s instead of Xboxes. We need a company that focuses less on the mainstream trends, and instead focuses on how to bring gaming forward as a medium. Nintendo may have been guilty of some major cock-ups, but ultimately, I see that their vision is to ask questions. Crazy questions, stupid ones even. But they are questions nonetheless, ones that challenge our views.

Of course, that is not to say that Nintendo is without criticism; their treatment of some of their IP has been awful, and the way they have monetised nostalgia is downright unethical at times. The Wii U was a colossal failure because of Nintendo’s obsession with reinventing the wheel time and again. Their approach to mobile and online spaces has been sadly lacking and oftentimes woeful, and again, unethical if you look at the way they treat Let’s Players.

But for all of the ire we can fire in Nintendo’s direction, do we really think that the games industry would be a better place without them? Nintendo are a gaming institution, and are as important, if not more important than the Sonys and Microsofts of the world. Given that the Switch has shown moderate success,  there is still something to be said about asking questions. 

In terms of the ‘console wars’, I think Nintendo see the futility of the graphical arms race, and what it is ultimately offering to the games industry. We don’t need consoles that bring us more power; that race is already won with the PC. What we need in the industry is innovation. What we need is a company that asks questions. And for all their criticisms, I think we all know that if Nintendo leave the console industry entirely, it won’t be a day for celebration. It would be a day for mourning. 

The Importance of Console Wars

Console wars are an unusual thing to me. So many years in gaming have been spent dividing people into camps based on their choice of console, and the conflict that happens as a result is so far over-the-top that it is comical to watch an internet forum as they debate the pros and cons of different black boxes that play games.

I used to struggle to see the reasoning behind console wars, but I do believe that a big part of why people are so emotionally heated over console choices is to do with buyer’s remorse; a feeling of negativity over spending a lot of money on a luxury product and the need to therefore justify the purchase to one’s self. Games consoles, with their prices frequently ranging in the plus-£200 bracket, are very expensive and difficult to justify as purchases. The need to reason with one’s self over such extravagant expenditure is probably one of the reasons why gamers become so emotionally-charged over their console; they are simply defending their choices, and given that so much money is seemingly at stake, it is understandable why such arguments occur.

Another reason why arguments occur is because gamers are unusually invested in one console over another. However, I don’t think that this investment is completely misguided; for example, if the PS4 absolutely destroyed the Xbox One in terms of sales and Microsoft decided as a result to completely discontinue support for their console, many gamers would be left with a useless black box with no official support that they have spent well over £200 to purchase.

But, I think that competition is a great thing in the games market, as in any other market. I appreciate that there are so many different brands involved in videogaming, from AMD and NVIDIA, to Xbox and PlayStation, this level of competition is good for the consumer, because it pushes these companies to do better. Competition, in general, means lower prices and better products.

This is why I think that the first console war that many gamers remember; that of SEGA Vs Nintendo, was so important to modern gaming. We, as a community, have much to thank Nintendo for, as they brought back consumer confidence in an industry thought dead and buried, and gifted us with many of the modern gamer tropes we see today. If you play a game, chances are that a Nintendo game influenced it somehow.

On the other hand, SEGA were seen as the dark horse of the 90’s, and had a goal of de-throning Nintendo from their position at the top of the gaming world. Many gamers recall a playground battle between SEGA kids and Nintendo kids, stemming mostly from which of the two consoles they got from their mothers. I didn’t experience such console animosity, but the 90’s were definitely the most iconic years for console wars.

What I think made SEGA so important to the story, however, was that they laid the foundations for consoles to come. Before the Mega Drive, Nintendo had a virtual monopoly over the console market. If you wanted to play video games, you either played on the PC (which has its own interesting history, especially in the UK), or you played Nintendo games. Then came the Mega Drive, and Sonic with it, and suddenly a console war began in earnest. Then after this came the PlayStation, and we all know how gaming history has gone on from there.

What I think that SEGA did that was so important, was show that somebody could challenge Nintendo. Suddenly, competing in the console market became viable. If Nintendo were the ones to bring back console gaming to the masses, SEGA were the ones that turned it into a true industry, with competing companies vying for consumer attention and dollars.

Console wars are very important, and while many gamers will shout at each other from across the Internet in flaming sessions of hatred over their choice of gaming black boxes, and many others will scoff at the former, the competition that is the reason behind all of this is very important to the industry. We should embrace how console wars have forced an arms race of sorts, meaning that companies are always trying to one-up each other and deliver the best entertainment possible in the hope that they will capture our hearts and earn dominance over gaming. We should also thank SEGA for their contribution in showing how viable it is to compete in a fledgling industry, and for shaping the modern gaming market that we know today.