https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJfCitvSsZQ

For those that don't want to watch the video:

Star Fox received the top spot on this list. I actually love Star Fox and I like the SNES game more than the 64 one, but am I the only one that feels Star Fox should actually be disqualified from being a choice?

Yes, the FX chip is part of the game cartridge, the "software," but in my line of thinking the FX chip is actually a piece of hardware. The Super Nintendo cannot run the game naturally without the help of the chip and most of the other games on the list are running on native hardware, sans extra bells and whistles.

Additionally, if you read up on what was said about the FX chip:

"The Super FX was so much more powerful than the SNES's standard processor that they joked that the SNES was just a box to hold the chip."

I vote no on Star Fox actually pushing the limits of the SNES (in the general sense) because it doesn't do it without "help," but what's your opinion?

I'd say it's fair game. Kudos to Nintendo devs for thinking outside of the box, especially since it may have been entirely plausible that people would continue to use the PCB's only for more mounting more memory since that was one of  the major limitations of the era.

Wasn't much of a fan of the subsequent uses of the chip, or maybe it was just the games themselves that could never quite match Star Fox...

Actually, I know this is off topic (but it's really not) am the only one that's still kind of impressed with Star Fox? I wrote a review of it and said this:

"Reinforcing such an argument is how cinematic Star Fox can make a small handful of polygons appear. I can't be the only one who gets chills watching the arwings soar through the sky as they depart from the base on Corneria or when Fox enters and escapes the twisted corridors of Andross' lair on Venom."

Visually the game did so much with so little. That really says something to me.

Agreed. However, the usage of the FX2 chip for the SNES version of Doom is an interesting footnote in today's world for all the wrong reasons.

Well, if it makes your point stand out more, I prefer the original to SF 64.

Yes, it is indeed very linear in terms of level design, but then again, that's part of made it feel "classic" from the get-go.

Am hoping that the new Wii U rendition can take it to new heights. I know that not many are fond of the Wii U's controller, but I find it to be very innovative and unique. At the same time, I can understand why most devs don't implement it in their work, they are probably scared to develop for the thing. So many great ideas that could all go wrong.

My wife and I had a blast with Metroid Blast (no pun intended), it's just great using the Wii controller for aiming all over the place. I know the game play for the new Star Fox has gotten bashed a bit from those who have actually played the demo, but I think it has great potential.

I'd say it's qualified because it included a GPU (or math coprocessor?) on the cartridge. That was a pretty cool way to circumvent the limitations of the console.

It blew my mind when I first realized how it worked. I'd always thought of the cartridge as just a static store of data, but really it's an interface that gives data back when you give it an address, and you can put anything you want behind that interface.

I wonder if anyone has done this with modern hardware. Like stick a cell phone CPU in an SNES cartridge and program against that.

I wasn't really saying this to enforce my point, my bad... I just thought I was in the minority in liking the SNES game more. Most people I've discussed the game with in person tend to favor the N64 take.

You know, though...

Back in line with the main point of the conversation...

Technically, the Wii U controller might be considered more "hardware" as well. Yet, again, I don't think I'd count it as such in the context of say Star Fox Zero when that comes out. I guess I'd consider both the chip and the controller a sort of "supplementary device" essential to play the games.

If SF Zero won any awards, I wouldn't think that I'd disqualify on the basis that it needed a particular "gimmick" in order to achieve its greatness.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's Platinum Games developing this, right?

While I wasn't planning on playing/buying it since I'm not planning on getting a WiiU, I was really happy that the series was getting a new game, then I got kind of mad when Nintendo announced they were handing the development off. However, at that time I didn't know who was getting the project.

If it's Platinum my fears are eased quite a bit.

Wow. I was surprised to not see Rendering Ranger. Instead of Cotton, I would've chose Scrambled Valkyrie.

Yup, it's platinum.

Getting a Wii U is, um. yeah...shall we say an investment with a limited return? So few games for it, mainly because of 3rd party development fear. I can't say that I blame devs for being scared. But then you get one that takes a bold chance and we get something unique like Affordable Space Adventures...

Well to be fair, in my eyes the XBox One and PS4 aren't that attractive either, but that's a poor comparison since I'm looking for any excuse not to buy anymore gaming hardware.

Perfectly legit in my eyes. It seems that in many respects. game developers (like many modern movie directors) really can't grasp the concept that game play and story are the most critical components to nail. The hardware is yielding the most visually impressive material ever. and yet the soul of these games often pales in comparison to even the "relics" of the 16-32 bit era. As a consequence, I find myself turning to classics more often than not, and not just for nostalgia. They just knew how to do things right then, probably because the technical limitations FORCED them to make the game as good as possible in the other less visually-oriented areas that actually matter in the grand scheme of things.

Just about every modern console or pc game I've tried really seems to be quite lacking. As such I haven't been able to conjure up a reason to buy either the PS4 yet or Xbox One yet, either. I doubt I will at this stage, although I am looking forward to seeing what Igarashi does with Bloodstained...

Agreed on everything you said... however I try to avoid the comparison between new and old because I think I'm influenced by nostalgia more than I should be. I do like the familiar trappings I grew up with, yet at the same time I can completely admit that some of those games, especially the ones I've replayed, have problems.

The only current gen game I have any interest in is what Star Ocean 5 turn out like but I'll probably never play it since I never touched 4. I had fun with 3 back when it came out. I wanted to replay 3 to see if it still stacks up but I don't have the patience.

However speaking of games that pushed their respective consoles, am I the only one that was impressed with Till the End of Time's combat? I thought that was a lot of action for the PlayStation 2 and it moved at damn brisk pace. I don't remember slow down in combat; I remember slow down on the world map which was just ironic.

But really, look at Star Ocean 2's combat and then look at Star Ocean 3. I still like SO2 but that was one hell of an upgrade.

I can't say I tried the series out, but if there's ever a collection/compilation...

In general, when SO originally came out, I was getting rather worn out with Square-Enix and their offerings. I still am today, for the most part, for the same reasons mentioned above. In all fairness, they have done their fair share of pushing systems to their limits, though. Still, I pine for the days when there was not such thing as a bad Square or Enix game...

But truth be told, I feel that the original Sega Mega drive could have really had some boundaries to push, had it not had such fierce competition from Nintendo's mascot...Even the PC-Engine or other early CD-based systems such as the 3D0 had some potential that they didn't get a chance to live up to due to the high cost, and perhaps just being too far ahead of their time.

Now SNK and the Neo Geo...expensive, but good gosh, the memory they could cram into those games back in the day was unheard of. Some of the games on that system will probably never get credited for pushing cart-based systems to their limit, that's for sure. Metal Slug blood-and-bullet slowdown, anyone?