Topic: NES, SNES or N64 ?

I think the N64's library gets a bad rap. It's probably the best it could be with all the third party companies leaving to jump onto the Playstation, or the ones that stayed that were getting acclimated to 3D gaming and didn't deliver (for an example see the Castlevania 64 games, atrocious in comparison the SOTN on the Playstation). The only genre you would expect in a console library those days it really lacks in is RPG's. It's got plenty of shooters, 3D platformers, sports games, great racing games, awesome party games, and it's a fun title to look for really obscure titles for. More often then not you'll see gamers talking about the same 15-20 titles off the system, and while there isn't many amazing stellar games there is a lot of fun to be had.

That being said, if you had to choose one It's still easily SNES. There is no gaps in the library of that system, it's the most satisfying game console I've ever owned and I didn't even grow up with it, I played my Uncle's a few times but my system was the N64 growing up. NES has to be appreciated for it's amazing library and starting franchises but I can't think of one facet where the NES beats the SNES. Every franchise that moved to 16 bit was better for it, and 16 bit is such a timeless look. 8 bit is very nostalgic but the games age pretty terribly to people who weren't around when it was relevant.

Every Franchise wasn't better from moving to 16 bit - Castlevania certainly wasn't.

The best two are Rondo of Blood and Castlevania III (X68000 is 16bit but the port is on the Playstation and it isn't very good). SOTN should have been on the Saturn first and foremost (Then ported if necessary) it would have been better for it. It would have looked beautiful. (The way it was done was the Playstation version was badly ported).

Alex Kidd was better in the games prior to 16bit.

Crisis Force (Famicom) is up there with the best SNES games in the genre. (Certainly much better than most of the early ones plagued by slowdown).

Definitely SNES. The amount of polished masterpieces of pretty much every available genre alone is enough of a reason.
NES was good, but lacked a bit of variety due to technical limitations.
N64 was terrible. Even their best games were mind numbing in terms of slowness and floaty controls, and the PS1 heavily outclassed it in no time, while NES and SNES had good competition, but except for some SEGA games nothing worth switching over for.

Super Nintendo. Had the best games out of the three, graphics that aged the best, and it had great music too.

@WaveBoy I think the NES- and N64 eras have both aged poorly in the graphical department. Most NES sprites haven't aged all that much better than Mario's two-torsoed 64 model. Good thing they kept flickering in and out of existence! Overall, I'd say the muddy textures and low-poly models of the N64 are even fraglier than the generally soulless NES sprites, but that's not a compliment for the NES.

Awful, horrible controller notwithstanding, I do think that most N64 games have aged better than most NES games when it comes to gameplay. A lot of classic NES games (though there are several exceptions) just feel kind of sloppy to me, and they don't have the charm, sound design, or graphics/animation to make up for it. The SNES seems to fix a lot of problems I have with the NES. (The GameCube does the same for the N64.)

Gurfically speaking, the 16-bit consoles have some of the best 2D animation, even to this day. I thank Virgin Interactive's “digicel” process for that, but even some of the pixel art is fine, because at least I never have to guess at what things are supposed to be. Nowadays people are trying to pass Adobe Flash-looking rickety old Pizza Time Theater animatronics off as acceptable animation. At least there's Wario Land: Shake It! to counter that.

Get all 3 if you can! If not I'd start with NES, because the NES is where a lot of popular games got their start.

It's only a competition between the NES and SNES. N64 is nothing more than an overrated Gen Y babysitter with a handful of good games. Personally, I say go for the SNES. Games like Final Fantasy 6, Earthbound, Donkey Kong Country 1-3, Castlevania 4, Megaman X1-X3, UN Squadron, Zombies Ate My Neighbours and Contra 3 just to name a fraction of that system's amazing and varied library.

Getting an NES will not be the wrong choice either however. Plenty of great games, mainly for platformers and shoot em ups. Many of it's genres however haven't aged quite well, mainly RPGs.

If you want a better alternative to the N64, get a PlayStation. That way you got games like Final Fantasy 7-9, Tactics, Suikoden 2, Resident Evil 1-3, Metal Gear Solid, Crash Bandicoot 1-3, Dino Crisis, Castlevania SOTN, Megaman X3-X6 and Xenogears plus many more.

I'd probably go SNES > N64 >>>>> NES

I have to say N64, personally.
SNES is also a great choice. I think the SNES is backwards compatible with NES games.

I cannot tolerate the N64 either. (I have the Gamecube disk with OOT and Master Quest and I can put up with that better. Still on a CRT).

Saturn 2D I want to start getting into though. (All the other versions of Megaman X4 look totally lifeless next to the Saturn one and stuff like Astal is about as good looking as 2D sprite based ever got. These days the best we ever seem to get is Neo Geo/CPS level and that is very rare).

I suppose the N64 being the only one that you cannot officially get RGB out of makes quite a difference.

Probably SNES just barely beating out the 64, then the NES somewhere behind.

SNES, and it's not even close. It still has one of the best software libraries in console history. I would actually rank both NES and N64 as lower tier Nintendo systems.

In retrospect, the N64 feels more like an early prototype of the Gamecube, in that everything the N64 did, the Gamecube simply did better. There are almost no games on the N64 that truly feel timeless and unique to me. They were made obsolete with the arrival of the Gamecube. And yes, the N64 controller is among the worst ever designed.

And honestly, did anyone have a NES that actually worked properly? Half of my memories of the system are that damn flashing green screen and blowing on cartridges. 8-bit graphics have also aged terribly. They're ugly as sin to look at now. The 16-bit graphics of Genesis and SNES both still look great today.

@Waveboy I'm on the other end of the spectrum. I thought Super Mario World was better than any Mario game on the NES. I also enjoyed Mega Man X 1 & 2 far more than any of the NES Mega Man titles. Donkey Kong Country was also a huge improvement over the original Donkey Kong.

snes, it's a tough call between the nes and snes though

I would say N64 if you are interested in multiplayer. Many games were made for 2-4 players.
If you are doing single player most of the time, the SNES is the best choice, hands down.

The NES, as much as I loved it, has become dated. It's more of a relic, despite its many great games. It's great to play for nostalgia, but it doesn't carry the timelessness of the SNES software offerings.

SNES is the best, no questions asked. There are so many amazing games for you to play on it.
I do love the N64, but it doesn't have as much to it, and the NES I personally don't have that many fond memories of, so I can't recommend it all that much. Though it might be that I never owned any all that impressive games for it.

I'd have to go with SNES. It has a very well balanced library of games, and most genres that I can think of are covered on the system.

super nes here...