Worst console ever made?

Anyone voting for things like the PS2, Wii, Wii U, Xbox One etc either doesn't know video games, or is 12 years old. Get outta here with that noise

@storm_of_swords: You started out with reason and intelligence, then ended on pure trolling fanboyism, sad very sad.

It has to be the Atari Jaguar or the Phillips CDI neither one of these consoles had a game worth playing

The Jaguar had a good port of Doom, but why in the hell would you play Doom on Jaguar?

The Amiga CD32 slips between those 2. Look at it! That controller isn't upside down. Someone designed that!

Virtual boy made me throw up, so that.

Jesus... Dude, that is the most ridiculous answer to a question I have read in here in a long time. Ouya, Dreamcast (ruined Sega in consoles), Atari Jaguar, Odyssey, NeoGeo, CDi....

C'mon, man. Use your head.

@boycie: Ok yeah... that gets a pass from being an ignorant choice as that's ugly as hell.

Either the Virtual Boy or Atari Jaguar would probably get my vote.

This is kind-of a weird question to ask, what are we supposed to base this on? Sales? Raw performance? Software?

I don't really know what's the worst console, all I can talk about is the least favorite console I've ever owned and that would probably be the Wii but for all its flaws and for all the reasons I didn't like it so much it was very far from being the worst console in any aspect really.

Seems like most on here listing consoles as the worse are not versed in gaming history. Cute.

Sega knew from the start of the Dreamcasts incarnation was end-game. As far as quality goes, they went all out.

A half truth. The Sega Saturn was more expensive than the Playstation and difficult to developer for. It also solely focused on Japan ignoring the West to own detriment.

Marketing style had also changed, with different teams on the Saturn lacking the underground MTV generation approach the Genesis and Playstation eventually mimicked. Sonic itself, a genius piece of marketing, advertising itself as everything Mario wasn't.

The 32X as a concept was actually a very good piece of hardware, bridging the gap between next-generation at a cheaper price point, much like how the Master System acted as a cheaper alternative to the Mega-Drive. Had it been properly supported, it would have provided a far closer arcade experience than the Mega-Drive. For example- It was the first time Space Harrier was practically a 1/1 of it's arcade original and the best port of Mortal Kombat 2. For arcade fans it could have easily developed into a cult console.

The Playstation 2 had better marketing, and most importantly, a dvd player, while the Dreamcast used a GD-ROM.

I wouldn’t say rhe Wii U or Dreamcast as they were both really well made consoles with lots of cool first party games. They flopped sales wise though but the consoles are actually great. My vote is the Atari 5200. That thing pissed people off. Hardware was hardly an upgrade and it came with the worst controller ever. Thankfully Nintendo came around with the Famicom to save gaming and take us to where we are now.

@Telekill: very legit answers. How anyone can say Wii U, Dreamcast, or Xbox 1 shocks me with the limited gaming knowledge here at Gamespot

Whoever mentioned the Amiga CD32, give that man a coke. It's worth mentioning. I wont mention ones by minor players trying to swindle people. Let's be honest, worst comes from when one of the big boys falls badly. The Jaguar. The Wii U. The 7800. The CDI.

Piss 4

Neo Geo was awesome lol

Any answer that is Not Nintendo's Virtual Boy is the wrong answer.

That Virtual Boy was DEAD from day 1.

We're talking hardware, right? Let's see... Can't run at 60fps. Can't run 4K. Runs hot. Sound like a jet engine. Filled with cockroaches. Has a network built for 2007. I think it's the PS4. It's....

The Souljagame console.

@pyro1245: Idiot fanboy troll confirmed.

Another bad one was the ngage.

I would consider bad consoles to have a library of crap games or a very small library or a system with out of touch with the times hardware. That said here's my list and reasons.

• Atari Lynx had some pretty boring games. 16 bit that had graphics closer to 8 bit and none of the games are very fun to legit play.
• Atari Jaguar. Same problems, pretty bad when Starfox on a 16 bit system is far superior to Cybermorph on a 64 bit system. While Tempest, Flashback (port) Alien vs Predator and a few others were perfectly fine games on their own, they didn't warrant spending $250 for the console that comes with a very crap game.
• Atari 7800. While the system finally had enough graphic power to properly port many early 80's well known arcade games like Burger Time, Joust, Galaga, etc. They were all games that were pretty worn out by the time of this console's release and didn't offer anything new. Nintendo took gaming to a new level where the gameplay had more meaning to you than your high score. A few exclusives like basketbrawl, while amusing, just lacked any long term enjoyment in comparison to the competition. You couldn't rent 7800 games at your local video store, your friends didn't have one so why would any young 80's kid want this hunk of crap?
• Atari 5200...well let's face it, all of Atari's stuff beyond the 2600 failed to produce a decent library of titles.
• TurboGraphix 16. While it certainly had plenty of exclusives, nearly all were mostly unheard of in the States. It had some gems like Devil's Crush and a few arcade ports like Splatterhouse. Many of them eventually got ported to Genesis or SNES. The DUO offered a few more of it's own but most of the CD Rom data was music tracks and little spent on actual game. As a system, there just wasn't much to it as the library was fairly generic overall.
• 32X Definitely a top candidate for crappy console despite being an add-on, it was it's own platform.
• Virtual Boy. We all know why and my eyes still haven't fully recovered.
• Tiger Game.com. It was so crap, you done forgot it ever existed didn't you?

While there are a lot of failed systems, that doesn't mean they weren't great. Dreamcast was epic. SegaCD had some great Amiga ports and the sequal to Another World not found on any other system. 3DO had some great titles for it's time as well as did the Saturn. They failed but still had libraries that were worth playing and are still enjoyable to this day. Then if you want to get into computers, they had tons more games and unique games you didn't find on consoles. C64, Amiga, FM Towns. So much goodness that was largely missed by most of us 80's kids in the States as far as playing games goes.

I can't believe people are nominating the Dreamcast. And the X1 and PS4? Y'all drunk

@pimphand_gamer: Turbo and 7800 I wouldnt have on that list as they both had some really good games on them, and the 7800 was the (that I know of) first backwards compatible console playing all of the 2600s games. Both might have been short lived but both were still good systems and still sought after.

Nah! They are just stupid.

@knight-k: it will be ok Xbot. Us PS fans have thick skin.

It's not trolling, it's my honest opinion. I can list at least one thing that I love about every single other console that Nintendo, Sega, Microsoft, and Sony has made except for the PS4. I made sure to say that I don't think the PS4 or any of the other consoles from the Big 4 are anywhere near as bad as the truly garbage consoles like the Philips CD-i, but out of all of the consoles from the Big 4 console makers, it's my least favorite.

I also made sure to specify that I was only talking about my personal taste and for my personal taste, it just doesn't offer any value to me since I'm not a fan of the type of exclusives that it offers and I prefer to play multiplats on another platform. I know that it's a good console for some people, but despite what some people here seem to believe, it's not great for everybody and definitely not for my personal taste. I'm sorry if the PS4 being my least favorite console from the Big 4 console makers upsets you, but it's how I honestly feel.

X360 20GB - RROD failure rate approaching 100%. How does it get worse than that?

Have you read through this thread? Yes, the question was "what is the worst console ever", but then instead of talking about the consoles that are truly the worst ever, most people in this thread were listing consoles from the Big 4 such as the Wii U, Gamecube, Dreamcast, Xbox One, and PS2 which clearly are not the worst consoles ever which is why I made my original post and then followed it up by saying "Now if you want to ignore all of the truly bad consoles and just limit this discussion to the consoles from the Big 4" which is what most people in this thread seemed to be doing so therefore I also provided my opinion on my least favorite from the Big 4 while making it clear that I did not consider it to be anywhere near one of the truly garbage consoles that some companies outside of the Big 4 have made. Yet you choose to attack me while ignoring all of the people listing consoles like the Wii U, Gamecube, Dreamcast, Xbox One, and PS2?

As for you wanting to go deep about me and Sony, as I've stated many times on this board, I just don't like their current direction and how they are pushing cinematics way too much while no longer providing the wide variety that they used to in the past. Still to this day, I quite enjoy my PS1 and PS2 and display them both proudly on my shelf. I just don't like the direction that they started going in with the PS3 and then double downed on even more with the PS4. They no longer provide the types of games that appeal to me and I can't help but be a little disappointed and frustrated about that. Simple as that.

@storm_of_swords: This is sich a BS argument. The PS4 has much more variety than the X1. 200+ games more alone than X1 with 75+ metacritic score of every genre possible.

I say Sega Saturn. It killed SEGA.(It also gave the developers a lot of headaches due to it's hardware)

I get what your saying about the XBOXONE. It's like owning a Korg Trinity Pro-X when all you want is 1950's Hammond B3.

The Saturn is a weird one. I didn't find out about it till after the DC was discontinued!

If it was sold and marketed in the UK it would definitely have got new games from all the UK based developers and they would not have a problem with that hardware.

The original port of Quake ran at 60fps but John Carmack ordered it rewritten because the quads were too distorted.

Anyway. There are a few games which show it could do 3d nearly as well as the PS1 but Japanese games were less 3d focused and still content with long 2d rpgs and beat em ups.

Radiant Silvergun on the Saturn looks pretty darn cool.

PC

Kind of amazing how such a short post can be so stupid.

Of the consoles that I have owned, I would say the Turbo Graphix 16. It was a not a great console. (despite it having one of my favorite games on it Tricky Kick)

@pyro1245 said:

We're talking hardware, right? Let's see... Can't run at 60fps. Can't run 4K. Runs hot. Sound like a jet engine. Filled with cockroaches. Has a network built for 2007. I think it's the PS4. It's....

Short and sweet. lol

Of the successful ones, the Xbox One, for sure. The launch was a failure, the line-up is a failure, they did nothing to redeem themselves until now and they failed to live up to the X360.

That said, of all time it's hard to argue, but maybe Phillips CDI.

Wii because the Wii controller and motion controls suck. It made the entire game library unplayable.

Games were completely ruined because of terrible gimmick controls and camera system.

But keep drinking the kool aid and pretending you actually liked them over regular controller methods.

There is a reason why motion controllers didn’t take over. It’s officially a flop.

Where did I ever say that the Xbox One has a lot of variety in their exclusives? I was comparing the PS4's variety to the variety that Sony used to provide on the PS1 and PS2. This had nothing to do with the Xbox One and I'm not a fan of most Xbox One exclusives either. In fact, I just made a post about that yesterday in the "Microsoft exclusives" thread and nobody attacked me for my opinion that I don't really care for most Xbox One exclusives yet one apparently can't say anything even remotely negative about the PS4 around here without being attacked for their opinion.

The Xbox One does have at least one exclusive that I do care about though which is Cuphead whereas the PS4 has zero. One isn't much but it's at least better than zero. Furthermore, the Xbox One is my preferred platform for playing multiplats due to it's controller and online service which gives it value to me. The PS4 has no exclusives that I care about anymore and I have other platforms that I prefer to play multiplats on, so therefore it has no value to me. If it has value to you then good for you, but it doesn't for me and my taste and I've clearly explained the reasons. Why do some people have such a hard time accepting that?

Your Opinions and what You prefer are wrong... Flat out unarguably Wrong I tellz ya. MS/Xbox sucks. Resistance is futile...

Sarc off. lol :P

The award goes to the Pippin.

You fanboys calling out the Xbox One in this thread are complete morons. There are consoles that were so much worse:

CD-I
3DO
Virtual Boy
Atari Jaguar
WiiU - Hell Nintendo had to release another console to cover up this failure.
Pippin
Sega Saturn
Commodore CDTV
Nintendo 64DD
Commodore 64
Atari 5200

Just to name a few.

I keep seeing the Wii U listed as the worst console ever made... Not by a long shot. The Wii U was fine. The marketing wasn't. Also, did you know the Wii U holds the record for the largest launch day line up in the US? Look it up. Somewhere around 25 games on day one. Worst console ever made... right.

Anyone who mentions any console made even in the last four generations is far too young to have experienced TRULY bad consoles like the CD-I, Jaguar or 3D0. Ahh.. ignorant youth.

@Xabiss: Why have you listed the Commodore 64? The C64 was a home Computer, not a console.

There was a console version of the C64, the 'Commodore 64 Games System' or 'C64GS'. Released in 1990, a whole 8 years after the C64 Computer, it was already obsolete by the time it came out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_CDTV

The CDTV is essentially a Commodore Amiga 500 home computer with a CD-ROM drive and remote control. With the optional keyboard, mouse, and floppy disk drive, it gained the functionality of the regular Amiga.^[3] Commodore marketed the machine as an all-in-one multimedia appliance. As such, it targeted the same market as the Philips CD-i. The expected market for multimedia appliances did not materialize, and neither machine met with any real commercial success. Though the CDTV was based entirely on Amigahardware, it was marketed strictly as a CDTV, with the Amiga name omitted from product branding.

@Xabiss: Yeah, I know about the Commodore CDTV, it was a major flop, although at the time it looked awesome - at least it did in pictures anyway. Far too ahead of it's time, and expensive.

But in your list, last but one, you've put the C64? The C64 sold over 30 million machines, that's excellent for a 1980's computer. It was also my first computer, way back in 1987.