do you consider these game systems?

[The Collector]

First of all the Socrates.....i have one with a few carts, but i never see any lists for this thing. Is it a game system or a "learning system"?

Then there is the Leapster, its a portable system for kids(think twice the size of a GBA). They go for about $85 each, with $20 games. However, its only geared toward ages 4-10. But...it has a nice 4" screen, the biggest portable i've seen. I have 2 of them in my closet for my kids birthdays. But I'm considering making them share one and keep they other for myself :evil: , if its worth having in my collection.

Opinions please, thanks.

[vision89]

When it all comes down to it I consider them game systems. Though I'm really speaking more towards the Socrates since I don't know anything about the Leapster. The Socrates hooks up to the tv and plays game cartridges like other systems. The only difference is they are learning games and nothing else. I've had a few Socrates, they are worth next to nothing, usually about $5-$10 or so. If it's for your' kids though I'd probably just let them play it. It will teach them something, if nothing else; and lets face it, nothing makes you feel good like watching one of your' kids enjoying a video game. Brings back feelings from the good ol' days.

[Videogamerdaryll]

First of all the Socrates.....i have one with a few carts, but i never see any lists for this thing. Is it a game system or a "learning system"?

Then there is the Leapster, its a portable system for kids(think twice the size of a GBA). They go for about $85 each, with $20 games. However, its only geared toward ages 4-10. But...it has a nice 4" screen, the biggest portable i've seen. I have 2 of them in my closet for my kids birthdays. But I'm considering making them share one and keep they other for myself :evil: , if its worth having in my collection.

Opinions please, thanks.

I collect them myself..I consider them game systems as part of my video game collection.
I even consider the SEGA PICO a game system since it has carts that are exchangeable.
My Son loves these systems.
Though when asked about them I call them learning game systems..

[christianscott27]

what makes a game system for me is well...GAMES!!!!!!!

so if there are no games for these eduturds then you've just got yet another example of what not to give a kid for christmas. wonder if anybody ever made class validictorian and credited the PICO :)

but if just hooking up to a TV and having carts makes it a game system... then whats a handheld game? does speak n' spell count?

no but speak and math does....bah-chah!

[LazingBlazers]

Do I consider those game systems?

No. LOL

[Garry Silljo]

I would say that they count. I personally don't have an interest in collecting for them, but by my persoanl definition of a game system, they are. The games don't have to be fun for it to count, there just have to be games, and there are. I also count to the Pico, but as mentioned before, dont actively collect for it do to a lack of personal interest... someday maybe.... MAYBE.

[evilmess]

I think the Pixter (Color) is a pretty cool game-like toy for it's intended audience.

http://www.fisher-price.com/us/pixter/

Plus it's made by Fisher-Price and old FP stuff is very collectible right now. When the children who own these toys get to be our age i'm sure it will be a collectible item.

I consider toys like this to be learning toys and as transition toys that help young children understand and accept this kind of entertainment as a medium for enjoyment.

[Ed Oscuro]

Heh, listen for a certain well known sound when the Pixter demo starts up :P

I think the Rescue Heroes maze thing looks a lot like some old arcade games...shouldn't that count for something? :P

It's also a very sleek and nice looking console :)

[orrimarrko]

No.

However, a collectible is only in the eye of the beholder.

Quite honestly, I don't think the PICO should be included in the guide, but to each their own.

If it wasn't made by SEGA, would you even look at it? Perhaps.

The collecting scene if big enough as it is, I don't need to search for new ways to make it bigger than it already is.

Again - just my opinion, and you can collect whatever makes you happy!

[rbudrick]

There's actually a lot of shit-ass little systems like this that don't get counted. Mostly, this is because they are educational systems that no one would play past 6 years old, with some exceptions, but no one cares. Wal mart has carried crap loads of them over the years. I'm sure many of you have seen in the toy department those little systems that look like laptops, fold up like laptops, and even have keyborards and trackballs built in, but are made for kids. They accept different cartridges, but they are largely ignored beacause 1) they don't connect to a tv 2)they are educational systems (mostly) 3)they look like computers (laptops, pcs) but aren't (let's leave the C64 and it's carts out of this, right? Pfft ;-) ) 4) No one on DP has documented them yet :D and 5) They suck.

But a lot of systems suck ass. Channel F, N-Gage, R-zone, Game.com, anyone? Yet we still document them. We document the Pico too, but not the Socrates. Why? Because Sega made it. There is certainly a prejudice against these systems, some would say rightfully so, but I argue otherwise. They should be documented, or at the VERY LEAST, recognized to be documented in the future.

-Rob

[orrimarrko]

Ok - I didn't want to get into this, but here's the REAL reason, in my opinion.

Whether a system blows dog or not has nothing to do with it.

Those systems aren't counted for one simple reason; one factor that they ALL have in common (including the SEGA PICO, which is why I don 't count it.)

THEY ARE ALL FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, AND WERE NEVER MARKETED (OR INTENDED TO BE MARKETED) AS VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS!!!

They are electronic learning devices clearly produced and marketed to children, to aid in the learning process.

Note - NOT video games, learning aids.

By some of your rationale, we should be counting the Leapfrog system, or some Baby Einstein crap - just because they can play educationally related games.

They aren't video games, just tools to help children learn 1+1=2, and "C" comes after "B" and before "D".

If they were intended to be considered video games, they clearly would have been marketed as such.

Again, just my opinion. But some logic has to prevail here - every "electronic" device that can function in a gaming capacity is not necessarily a "video game system".

Debate on...

[ventrra]

THEY ARE ALL FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, AND WERE NEVER MARKETED (OR INTENDED TO BE MARKETED) AS VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS!!!
Pretty weak argument, there. Techinically, the NES wasn't marketed as a "Video Game System", but rather an "Entertainment System". The venerable 2600 says that it's a "Video Computer System" right on it. (I know, I'm stretching the point, however....)

Personally, I can't see that how things are marketed makes any real difference in this argument, after all, many of the "classic" "game systems" were hardly marketed at all. Further, I have to agree with the idea that if it has "Games" (of a sort, anyway) and it is a system (again of a sort), then the term "Game System" seems like it should apply.

[can_dude]

I personally say that the socrates and Pico are game systems...but, they are not game consoles...if you take the definition of a console as gaming for primary function. So let them be systems, but definitely not consoles...

[TNTPLUST]

All I have to say about this topic..

FOLLOWERS: Oh! Oh! Ohh! Oh! Ah! Oh!
ARTHUR: He has given us a sign!
FOLLOWER: Oh!
SHOE FOLLOWER: He has given us... His shoe!
ARTHUR: The shoe is the sign. Let us follow His example.
SPIKE: What?
ARTHUR: Let us, like Him, hold up one shoe and let the other be upon our foot, for this is His sign, that all who follow Him shall do likewise.
EDDIE: Yes.
SHOE FOLLOWER: No, no, no. The shoe is...
YOUTH: No.
SHOE FOLLOWER: ...a sign that we must gather shoes together in abundance.
GIRL: Cast off...
SPIKE: Aye. What?
GIRL: ...the shoes! Follow the Gourd!
SHOE FOLLOWER: No! Let us gather shoes together!
FRANK: Yes.
SHOE FOLLOWER: Let me!
ELSIE: Oh, get off!
YOUTH: No, no! It is a sign that, like Him, we must think not of the things of the body, but of the face and head!
SHOE FOLLOWER: Give me your shoe!
YOUTH: Get off!
GIRL: Follow the Gourd! The Holy Gourd of Jerusalem!
FOLLOWER: The Gourd!
HARRY: Hold up the sandal, as He has commanded us!
ARTHUR: It is a shoe! It is a shoe!
HARRY: It's a sandal!
ARTHUR: No, it isn't!
GIRL: Cast it away!
ARTHUR: Put it on!
YOUTH: And clear off!
SHOE FOLLOWER: Take the shoes and follow Him!
GIRL: Come,...
FRANK: Yes!
GIRL: ...all ye who call yourself Gourdenes!
SPIKE: Stop! Stop! Stop, I say! Stop! Let us-- let us pray. Yea, He cometh to us, like the seed to the grain.


For those who get it cheers :D For those who don't just ignore me :P

[orrimarrko]

THEY ARE ALL FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, AND WERE NEVER MARKETED (OR INTENDED TO BE MARKETED) AS VIDEO GAME SYSTEMS!!!
Pretty weak argument, there. Techinically, the NES wasn't marketed as a "Video Game System", but rather an "Entertainment System". The venerable 2600 says that it's a "Video Computer System" right on it. (I know, I'm stretching the point, however....)

Personally, I can't see that how things are marketed makes any real difference in this argument, after all, many of the "classic" "game systems" were hardly marketed at all. Further, I have to agree with the idea that if it has "Games" (of a sort, anyway) and it is a system (again of a sort), then the term "Game System" seems like it should apply.

Hmm...

If you don't think that marketing has anything to do with it, you're kidding yourself - seriously.

Also, you would be incorrect in stating that many of the classic game systems "were hardly marketed at all." You need to think of everything in respect to the marketing aspects of the time of their release.

The 2600 and Intellivision were marketed FURIOUSLY! TV, print - the works. In fact, the way those particular systems were marketed had a direct impact on the future marketing strategies in the video game industry.

If you are speaking of the Odyssey, Telstar, Fairchild, etc., you would still be incorrect. They marketed themselves in magazines, radio and television (later.) The amount of advertising and product positioning was consistent with other products in their time, which is obviously less than today.

Marketing has EVERYTHING to do with the intent of a product, especially as a video game system. Don't get semantical about the exact name chosen, that's irrelevant.

Nintendo chose "Entertainment System" for a good reason. The Video Game crash of 1983 left a huge negative taste in many people's mouths - including retailers. The words "Entertainment System" were specifically chosen to imply that the whole family could be "entertained" while using their product. It was actually very smart on their part.

Product positioning, through marketing, is an essential component in that product's success. Companies spend millions of dollars to know EXACTLY how to market their product. Companies like those who make these "Edu-toys" do it as well.

Believe me, they are marketing their products exactly as they intend to. There is no mistake that they are not positioned as "video game systems" (or consoles, or any other word you would like to use).

If they wanted to throw their hat into the "video game" arena, they would have done so - and still reached their target audience (children and their parents.)

It is my opinion that they are intentionally NOT marketing their products as video games - no general advertising in any video game magazines or other accepted formats, product positioning in retail stores is NO WHERE NEAR video games or their consoles, etc.

Since they aren't trying to make their products out to be "video game systems", why the hell are we? O_O

[ventrra]

Let me just state that my definition is a rather cut-and-dried sort of approach to the question. In short (well, sort of) I will break my definition down thusly:
Video Game System:
VIDEO A system refering to the use mostly by the eyes. If you can see it, it is viusal and if it is in motion, it probably qualifies in some respect as "video".
GAME A competition of sorts. Not limited to human vs. human, but also including human vs. machine, and some mixtures therein. This would well include games that are meant to be educational (i.e.: Typing of the Dead, Math Gran Prix).
System A device on which the previously mentioned "games" are played: in this case mostly by using visual stimuli.\


It is my opinion that they are intentionally NOT marketing their products as video games - no general advertising in any video game magazines or other accepted formats, product positioning in retail stores is NO WHERE NEAR video games or their consoles, etc.
This seems to be more a matter of money to me rather than of anything else. Certainly I have seen occasional ads for some of these devices in some video game magazines, however I'd say that many of the companies involved can hardly be expected to place ads in such abundance and expense in realtion to companies like Nintendo, Sony, Sega, or Microsoft.
As strange as it may seem to you, where I live , I had never seen advertisements for such "Game Systems" such as the Atari Jaguar or the 3DO, but I've seen quite a number of commercials and ads for the Leapfrog Leapster. By your example, It doesn't seem like I should be considering the Jaguar or 3DO to be game systems, but the Leapster AS ONE.
Now, if you were talking about "entertainment", well, that's a different story entirely.

[orrimarrko]

This seems to be more a matter of money to me rather than of anything else. Certainly I have seen occasional ads for some of these devices in some video game magazines, however I'd say that many of the companies involved can hardly be expected to place ads in such abundance and expense in realtion to companies like Nintendo, Sony, Sega, or Microsoft.

Sorry, that has absolutely no logical basis. The companies are out to make money on their products. If their true target audience read those magazines, they would DEFINITELY spend the money to place ads there. But they don't for a reason, and it's not money. It's not a competative marketing campaign, as the target audiences are, in fact, DIFFERENT! They don't place ads there, because they aren't selling to the video game public!


As strange as it may seem to you, where I live , I had never seen advertisements for such "Game Systems" such as the Atari Jaguar or the 3DO, but I've seen quite a number of commercials and ads for the Leapfrog Leapster. By your example, It doesn't seem like I should be considering the Jaguar or 3DO to be game systems, but the Leapster AS ONE.

Again, flawed logic, and inaccurate to boot. Just because you didn't catch the ads placed 10 YEARS AGO for the 3DO, or 11 YEARS AGO for the Jaguar, doesn't mean they weren't there. Believe me, they were. Because you catch an ad on the Cartoon Network for the Leapfrog Leapster today means that you can compare it with systems that have been dead for almost a decade? There aren't any ads for them anymore, for obvious reasons. The Leapster HAS to advertise somewhere, and chooses to do so in the CORRECT venue.

Again, collect what you want, certainly. But to categorically classify every electronic piece of shit that can play a game as a "Video Game System" is just plan ridiculous.

What's next, the watch that can also play Ms. Pac-Man?

[ventrra]

As strange as it may seem to you, where I live , I had never seen advertisements for such "Game Systems" such as the Atari Jaguar or the 3DO, but I've seen quite a number of commercials and ads for the Leapfrog Leapster. By your example, It doesn't seem like I should be considering the Jaguar or 3DO to be game systems, but the Leapster AS ONE.

Again, flawed logic, and inaccurate to boot. Just because you didn't catch the ads placed 10 YEARS AGO for the 3DO, or 11 YEARS AGO for the Jaguar, doesn't mean they weren't there. Believe me, they were. Because you catch an ad on the Cartoon Network for the Leapfrog Leapster today means that you can compare it with systems that have been dead for almost a decade? There aren't any ads for them anymore, for obvious reasons. The Leapster HAS to advertise somewhere, and chooses to do so in the CORRECT venue.

You know, it's pretty obvious that you really live in a very large city. Maybe in AUSTIN, TX ads showed, but not here. In case you don't have any idea about it, I'm over 30 years old and I can easily remember commercials for the VCS! Those Leapfrog commecials were NOT on Cartoon Network, instead they were on the local network stations (maybe you've heard of a few of them: ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc.?). Or, another rebuttal to you: just because you downloaded a few commercials off of the internet doesn't mean that they were shown everywhere.
Your remarks don't match my experiences in the slightest. I can list what I've seen over the years as far as video games go. Heck, my parents were avid video game players and were always on the look for video games, not just me.
Let's look at few examples of what I remember advertised, shall we?
Atari 2600/VCS : Advertising was done to death on TV including MsPac-man, ET, "under $50", etc.
Intellivision: George Plimpton
Odyssey2: I saw one Wizard of Odyssey commercial.
Atari 5200: The only ads I saw of this were in the back of comic books, usually for a 2600 game, with a line of text that read "also for the Atari 5200".
Vectrex: Nothing.
NES: a large number of varying commercials.
PSX: a lot of these, too.
SMS: Just a comic book ad.
TurboGragfx-16: I didn't know about it until after it was long dead.
Dreamcast: If it weren't for the displays in the local stores, I wouldn't have known about it, either.
Leapster: Already noted above.
And these are just the tip of the iceburg. Heck, I saw ads for the CD-I on local TV. As for cable, I grew up in the country, there wasn't any.


Again, collect what you want, certainly. But to categorically classify every electronic piece of shit that can play a game as a "Video Game System" is just plan ridiculous.
Did you read my definition?

In short (well, sort of) I will break my definition down thusly:
Video Game System:
VIDEO A system refering to the use mostly by the eyes. If you can see it, it is viusal and if it is in motion, it probably qualifies in some respect as "video".
GAME A competition of sorts. Not limited to human vs. human, but also including human vs. machine, and some mixtures therein. This would well include games that are meant to be educational (i.e.: Typing of the Dead, Math Gran Prix).
System A device on which the previously mentioned "games" are played: in this case mostly by using visual stimuli.
All of these items together are needed to qualify. As in: not just any "piece of shit".

Of course, the Digital Press Video Gaming Guide has the Atari XE, Commodore 64, Vic-20, and so on in it. I believe that most of those were advertised as computers.