After seeing Batista Harpu's SNES challenge and some other thing stuff I'd wondered what retro console would be the toughest to do a complete playthrough of the entire library? I would argue the NES/FC would be the worst because there's a lot of arcade games especially in the early part of its run with no actual ending that depend on ninja reflexes. the PC Engine and up at least usually have actual endings and more forgiving controls/game design. the Mega Drive might not be so bad as the library is smaller and more Western-focused with less moonrune stuff and slow tedious RPGs and strategy titles.
Do you really want to complete an entire library? How many football games do you want to play? What about Shanghai?
PS2 because of the sheer number of games including some very long RPG and strategy games.
Piggybacking off of , you trade off difficulty for time investment as you go through the history of gaming. Earlier systems have some of the more difficult games generally speaking. Later systems have expansive libraries (PS1 has like 4k games or something to that effect).
PS1 seems utterly impossible even if you’re a rich autistic shut in starting from age 13
Maybe once I become a gaming grandpa I'll dedicate the rest of my fleeting life to trying it in retirement.
Some Famicom games depend on un-emulatable peripherals IIRC.
By complete library we're generally assuming that to mean licensed NTSC titles since nobody cares about Euroshit.
OP you contradicted yourself.
>NES is harder because more arcade stuff
>Genesis is easier because more arcade stuff
i think he means NES games have super jank controls and often no ending. most MD games can be completed and aren't as hard to play.
I might have more fun playing MD stuff, NES games are more like a torture test. Sometimes they're fun but mostly they seem like they're just meant to frick with you.
>After seeing Batista Harpu's SNES challenge and
why would you do this when you could be outside learning a useful skill, having sex, etc
The SNES library is really fricking long and 40% of the games are in moonrunes.
the Mexican Runner's playthrough was tough enough and he only did the licensed US NES library. Famicom stuff is a challenge non-Japanese could probably never pull off.
OP I started playing SEGA CD games three years ago, not intending to do full playthroughs of every game or anything. Downloaded a full US romset and I've still barely brushed the surface. Started with shmups and platformers, made my way to rail shooters and racing games, and I've yet to play some of the best games (Snatcher, the Lunar titles, Popful Mail past the opening stage etc) let alone the "bad" ones. When people say the entire platform is bad they have no clue what they are talking about
NES is bad for one specific reason, and that is the ambiguity of NES rom sets. Many of them are not only filled with multiple versions of games but also tons of pirate and unlicensed jankware. Bizarrely there are plenty of romsets that have these games and are still lacking some of the actual important titles on the system. This is why despite its tiny filesize I don't even bother with full NES romsets, there's just too much literal garbage to sift through
are you doing this in release order? if so good luck playing 100 crude NROM games before getting to the actually good Famicom stuff.
ok
>After seeing Batista Harpu's SNES challenge and
How can you even play stuff that's all in moonrunes?
disappointing that Famildaily didn't cover FDS stuff because that's a lot of games including some major releases he's missing
https://w.atwiki.jp/famicomall/
Every Famicom game completed (included FDS), a collaborative effort. No cheats used.
He said he's going to do it.
But anyway he's not a great reviewer, for one thing his skill level is only mid at best and I firmly believe that if you want to accurately review Famicom games, first, you need to get good. Secondly his opinion is often dictated by others: he will check the "online consensus" on a game before playing it and generally that becomes his opinion. Thirdly he is completely biased against lesser known games "why should you play this RPG when you could play Dragon Quest or Wizardry?" huuuh, maybe I've already played those? Maybe I will like this one more than DQ/Wiz ?
This bias is also true on the contrary: when it's a popular/critically acclaimed game he will say it's a masterpiece, yet while at the same time showing he doesn't know anything about the game. Or, complain about things in lesser known games, but not complain/mention those very same things when it's popular game.
In short yes it is nice to have gameplay videos about all these games especially the lesser known ones; but I don't think his opinion on a game's quality is worth much.
oh actually, he's started on the FDS
For NES, the rules would have to be:
>no language dependency or has a translation patch if it's a Famicom game
>could be actually played on a US model NES (so no expansion sound games or stuff that requires un-emulatable peripherals)
>playing on a shitty export model console with a flaky cartridge slot instead of importing an AV Famicom
You baka.
there's no perfect model of the console actually. the original FC has hard wired controllers and is RF out only, the AV FC lacks the controller mic and doesn't reproduce expansion sound properly due to a different audio mixing circuit.
Actually the later original FC fricks up ext. sound as well, only Famicoms made in 1988 and earlier handle it correctly.
>the original FC has hard wired controllers
There is a port on the front of the console that can be used for external pads. Unless the game has a 3 or 4 player mode (which is very rare), that controller acts as the player 1 controller.
>RF out only
Honk Kong Famicoms have AV out
up
The Atari consoles that aren't the 2600 would make a good fit.
Not worth the effort tbqh.
>wanting to play 50 pachinko and horse racing sims
No.