Summary Released in 1996, the Nintendo 64 was the first and only 64-Bit console. Known primarily for its platformers, the Nintendo 64 has a domestic library of 297 games. In this review, I briefly analyze the reason why Nintendo "lost" the console race.

Description Game cartridges are expensive pieces of junk. Years after release, they still command higher value over their CD counterpart, and for years I could brag that I had such a console that I could buy expensive crappy games for. Nintendo, in all honesty, screws over people well. Zelda, Mario 64. They gave me a sequel of a sequel of a sequel. I can't complain about a lack of effort. Just about every game they designed for the system, stand tall among many. Then, how could I consider this system such a debacle in the rather short history of gaming? Nintendo couldn't carry the system. Sega and their massive development arm couldn't save the Saturn, but they failed on a different set of counts; they never released the finer games stateside, and failed to capitalize upon their company image. Exactly the opposite as Nintendo is seen, as they literally thrive off of redundancy. Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Mario Kart. Mario RPG. One gets the image, I would hope. Therein lies the problem. Nintendo, doing the things the way Nintendo does, missed their chance to reach out to a different set of gamers who had come out of the Playstation gaming influx that occurred during those years. Sony thrived on bringing a glut of"new" games to the commonweal. Nintendo chose to stick by. Ever the conservative gaming scion--- they reinvent familiar worlds within themselves, building on a common platform in the same inbred development style that has arisen to many a great game. More importantly: on an audience expecting a new twist on the old idea. In Nintendo's case, an old, familiar gaming icon given a fresh new world. We know what to expect, in a general sense. One such expectancy that leads to much of the same. The Nintendo 64 was plagued by a lack of genre and character individuality, more so than the Playstation (which drew much of its strength from sheer number). Nintendo grew on variations on the same theme, some which shine, but in the end cater to the same audience. Nintendo's been treating the business the same as they always have, since the early nineties. Mascot Ad-Nauseum. Allow me to reiterate. Nintendo had Super Mario World, Sega had Sonic the Hedgehog. Nintendo had Mario 64. Sony had Final Fantasy VII. Nintendo had Luigi's Mansion/Super Mario Sunshine. Microsoft had Halo. Arguably, these games keep Nintendo from losing market share come launch time. That they do, but furthermore, they paint an image of the same. Mario=Nintendo. Mario=Childhood. Mario=Mario. Bad movies notwithstanding. As different these games are fundamentally, when opposed by games like Sonic, Final Fantasy VII, Halo....they're still Mario. you get the idea. Nintendo can continue to create original concepts regarding these established characters, but Mario, Zelda, and he/she/it remain as said. Mario is the Life and Bane of Nintendo. What does this have to do with the Nintendo 64? Simple. It means that not even its own third party publishers couldn't even compete with Nintendo. Do people buy a Nintendo console for Turok? No. The best way to compete with Nintendo, in the eyes of the rival producers (so they thought), is to play them at their own game. I'm not sure how the complexities of the cartridge proprietary format come in here business-wise, but I'm sure it wasn't pretty. Due to the market and format, there was no use to lose profit when you could spend less to release the same game on the Playstation; stand to gain more from a larger market, lower overhead cost, and not having to compete against those damned Super Mario Bros. The end product, in the 64's case was a lot of ugly, derivative platformers. None of these could match up with the end product of Nintendo and/or Rare's development teams, to be expected. With tenuous support from the major development teams the N64 straggled for a short time after the Playstation 2 release, and died, almost strictly a first/second party machine. No 2D fighter, (good) shooters, or true (non-Mario) RPG were ever released on the console. The graphics were far too muddy on the hardware, and I prefer the hard, jaggy polygons of the Saturn or the Playstation. Sound varied by developer to developer. No doubt, the sort of stuff being released on the N64 would shape the image of the system, but by that time Sega and Sony had driven the system to third place in the console "wars" (Nintendo already has -to a point- saved face with the Gamecube, fortunately). The superior games on the Nintendo 64 are already being ported (or redone on) to the Gamecube. A forthcoming update of Goldeneye is being developed by EA. Mario 64 will probably be ported, eventually. Nintendo can keep its -Mario- party games. There are only a few domestic releases worth mentioning, among them Ogre Battle, Mischief Makers and Harvest Moon stand tall. You may be able to find a few worthwhile Japanese games as well. The rest of the library consists of vapid licensed games, and some so-so wrestling games, far outpaced by anything on today's systems. Even the SNES remakes are arguably worse than the originals. The Playstation, Dreamcast and Saturn, each in their own right are far superior than the Nintendo 64. Save your money. Review Page Hits: 1 today (26 in the last 30 days) Create Your Own Review or