# Why hasn't Nintendo ported any of their first-party games to PC?



## Worldblender (Jul 29, 2020)

Of the other two current console producers: Microsoft is releasing almost all of their games for both Xbox and PC (Steam and Microsoft Store), and Sony is going to release one of their first-party games (that being Horizon Zero Dawn, because a former 3rd-party exclusive Death Stranding runs on the former's engine; how lucky for that to happen) for PC soon on August 7. In the case with Sony, releasing just one of their games for PC is better than none ever getting ported at all, although there could be some more of their first-party games that I haven't heard about that are also going to be ported to PC.

*But with Nintendo, not counting licensed PC games not published by them (mainly educational ones) and mobile games, has never ported a single one of their first-party or second-party games to PC* for however long they began producing video games since getting popular in the 1980s. If many of the big Japanese game studios are at least porting some of their games to PC, why won't Nintendo join with them and catch a growing trend? Some of this I could understand (it's all about the profits, I know! I don't want to look I'm forcing anyone to do things they don't want to do), but I still don't have the complete picture.
I'm grateful for unofficial efforts like the Super Mario 64 PC port for existing (I tried it, but did not complete the whole game due to various graphical and control issues inherent with most 3D Nintendo 64 games), but I wish that there could be some efforts started by Nintendo for porting their games to PC, so that we have fewer legal issues to worry about. *Even porting just one of their games, if it has to be a lesser-known or obscure franchise of theirs, is better than not porting any of their games to PC at all.
*
While I do own an unpatched Nintendo Switch, for getting into their first-party and third-party exclusives, I would prefer that I can do as much of my gaming  on PCs as possible. I can reduce how many computers I excessively own (I count video game consoles among them), and possibly reduce e-waste when they are no longer usable or repairable.
Some of this reads like a pipe dream I know, but I wanted to get my feelings out and see whether I'm alone in this or not.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jul 29, 2020)

Worldblender said:


> Some of this reads like a pipe dream I know, but I wanted to get my feelings out and see whether I'm alone in this or not.


Erm...sorry, but can you point out the part where this isn't a pipe dream? Because the only arguments in your post are "other companies do it" and "I would like it". Not exactly bad ones, but not really convincing ones either. 

Perhaps during the days of declining popularity in the wiiu period they would listen, but with switches selling like hotcakes, there's not much chance of them listening. Like you said: they never ported anything to PC since...well, ever. I'm not 100% sure, but they seem to follow the same approach apple doe: to be able to control the environment. 

Also: they probably know what comes next. After at most a few months of people being happy of finally having a nintendo game on their PC, they want either more ports or these games to follow the same routine as other PC games, namely discounts upon discounts (which, if followed, would disgruntle console owners). So why would they bother the costs of expanding their audience if the expanded audience wouldn't be grateful? It's the 80-20 rule, really: that 20 percent would take 80 percent of the cost(1)...so it's not really worth that much pursuing.



(1): console games are relatively easy in that there's only one hardware to build for. On PC, just about any sort of configuration (with keyboard, controller, mice? screen resolution? windows version?) is fair play, and every small error will be made big by people posting and sharing it everywhere.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jul 29, 2020)

Microsoft sells operating systems and has made it reasonably clear for years now that the console stuff is almost a loss leader to keep themselves and their technologies relevant in the gaming space which in turn helps their main businesses.

If Sony does anything it is usually some time after the release on their devices when the vast majority of profit has been extracted from sales, and likely any future stuff would have happened anyway.

Nintendo is in the business of selling exclusive access to things, tightly controlling distribution and quality (no mods on their consoles really save the super hardcore technical peeps), and then selling it back to you time and time again where the PC... with minimal effort you can play anything back to day 0 on a PC really and will be able to forever more. Not to mention do most of the main demographics care about the PC?
To that end directly against their own long term financial interests.


----------



## ital (Jul 29, 2020)

Nintendo don't follow trends. They set them.


----------



## Worldblender (Jul 29, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Erm...sorry, but can you point out the part where this isn't a pipe dream? Because the only arguments in your post are "other companies do it" and "I would like it". Not exactly bad ones, but not really convincing ones either.
> 
> Perhaps during the days of declining popularity in the wiiu period they would listen, but with switches selling like hotcakes, there's not much chance of them listening. Like you said: they never ported anything to PC since...well, ever. I'm not 100% sure, but they seem to follow the same approach apple doe: to be able to control the environment.
> 
> ...



All that you pointed out of what could be a pipe dream is right. Now that you say some additional things, some of which I already heard about before (single hardware config for consoles to make it easier to target), this makes it slightly easier for me to understand (full control over the environment like what Apple does, possibility of PC audience not being fully satisfied). If that's the best case, emulation of Nintendo games on PCs is the best option we have so far.


----------



## Clydefrosch (Jul 29, 2020)

because they have no real reason to do it.
porting their first party games to pc devalues their own consoles and devalues their financial gain too, because pc games are very much expected to drop in price within a month, unlike nintendo, who loves to sell 3 year old games at launch price.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jul 29, 2020)

Nintendo has a heavy reliance on their hardware and business model. If they ported their titles to PC? It'd be great, as it would provide an objectively better experience. However, it would drive people away from buying their hardware and services. This next bit is just me thinking. However, they're also adamantly against piracy, and they're probably worried about it happening in an environment they can't control.


----------



## Worldblender (Jul 29, 2020)

Here's something that came up: for all of Nintendo's franchises that are considered "dead" (haven't had a release within the past 5 years, or at least since the release of the Nintendo Switch, excluding their appearances in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate), couldn't they end up with PC ports as they're not the company's primary money makers? Which could help keep or resurrect such franchises for newer audiences? I wonder what would happen if these "dead" franchises were stay put for longer... 
Well, a trademark registration or renewal could mean something, but them alone don't mean much.


----------



## PizzaBitez (Jul 30, 2020)

Imagine playing super mario sunshine natively on the pc.


----------



## Worldblender (Sep 1, 2020)

I'm going to revive this with the news that Sony is now considering doing more PC ports in the near future: https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/202008/20-071E/

Once enough of their games get ported to PC, this would leave Nintendo as the only one out of the three console producers that doesn't release PC versions of their games.


----------



## CeeDee (Sep 1, 2020)

I think a big part of why is they lean heavily into the experience of playing their game in a controlled environment, built for being on their console, making full use of the "gimmicks"/console features that entails. The same way they're the only out of the three who isn't porting to PC, they're rather separate and different than the other two console manufacturers anyways. Porting their games to PC would limit the controlled environment they like, and would also miss out on the ability to build the games around their consoles' features / "gimmicks". 

Honestly, I'd say I'm pretty content with Nintendo emulation on PC. You can run most Nintendo games worth their salt, and rather well at that. Not much is truly being missed out on by Nintendo not porting to PC, something that just wouldn't happen anyways, honestly.


----------



## Kwyjor (Sep 1, 2020)

Worldblender said:


> I'm going to revive this with the news that Sony is now considering doing more PC ports in the near future: https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/202008/20-071E/
> 
> Once enough of their games get ported to PC, this would leave Nintendo as the only one out of the three console producers that doesn't release PC versions of their games.


Some would say a large part of Nintendo's continued survival relies on their exclusives.  Sony, on the other hand, has barely any exclusives left and I doubt their exclusives are a particularly big selling point anymore.

Look at Sega's old Genesis catalog.  They've sold and re-sold most of the games there so many times they can barely give them away.  Nintendo's approach seems quite reasonable.

Clearly what Nintendo needs to do is find some way to make money off of all the people who insist they know exactly what Nintendo should do, I always say.



Worldblender said:


> Some of this reads like a pipe dream I know


Hey, you should start a petition!  That'll show 'em! /s


----------



## Iamapirate (Sep 15, 2020)

Because their first party games are their biggest asset. The primary reason to buy their hardware.


----------



## Lumstar (Sep 15, 2020)

The PC is a developer's nightmare. Users expect your game to behave properly on hardware, from multiple vendors, ranging all the way from the lowliest netbooks to beastly desktops. What if your game works great on AMD GPUs, yet struggles on Nvidia? Anything like that. And a PC version with few graphics/control customization settings is going to be derided as a "bad console port".


----------



## Nobody_Important4u (Sep 21, 2020)

Just give up, Nintendo is never going to make ANY pc games unless they get into serious financial trouble.

The people above said it all.

First of all they like having control over environment and they like making they hardware unique in a way that can't be made the same way on pc, like how would you even do motion controls work?

And making games for one consoles is really good you can take full potential of the hardware and create something trurly unique and all the consoles are the same so if games works bad it's the developer fault only.
And no pc is made the same you have to make game compatible from weak laptops to nasa-like desktops, all the possible combinations of components are trurly insane, and it can also change depending on software too...

And you know well how they act when it comes to piracy, and the pc is basically a heaven for piracy!

And even if they did that, they would make the hardware they make much less appealing to the avarage consumer.
And when it comes to the argument "what if they realised they dead franchises because they don't make money out of it" the people would obviously want more.

It's better this way in my opinion, industry needs something like this and if you really want Nintendo games on pc, just use an emulator, maybe even go support developers of the emulator because those are people who trurly care about game preservation!

So as said at the beggning Nintendo is not going to touch pc unless they start having problems with money.


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Sep 21, 2020)

Nobody_Important4u said:


> They like making they hardware unique in a way that can't be made the same way on pc, like how would you even do motion controls work?



well you can connect joycons to pc and use motion control that way, it is a bit complicated tho


----------



## Kwyjor (Sep 21, 2020)

Nobody_Important4u said:


> they like making they hardware unique in a way that can't be made the same way on pc, like how would you even do motion controls work?


What makes you think motion controls can't be made for the PC?  There have been unofficial Windows drivers for the Wiimote for ages now; they're standard Bluetooth devices.  (And the "sensor bar" is just a couple of infrared light bulbs.)

Granted, most people don't have a PC in a place where it's comfortable to use motion controls, but that's a different matter.


----------



## Hells Malice (Sep 21, 2020)

This might actually be one of the dumbest questions I've ever seen asked on this site. 

Sony and Microsoft basically sell lite PC's with a few exclusives. Microsoft owns windows so really having games on Windows and Xbox is all the same to them. 

Nintendo thrives and survives purely on its first party titles. They don't need to expand their market. And they probably never will. They barely branched into mobile despite the potential of it, so they very likely will never go to pc.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Sep 21, 2020)

Kwyjor said:


> What makes you think motion controls can't be made for the PC?  There have been unofficial Windows drivers for the Wiimote for ages now; they're standard Bluetooth devices.  (And the "sensor bar" is just a couple of infrared light bulbs.)
> 
> Granted, most people don't have a PC in a place where it's comfortable to use motion controls, but that's a different matter.


Controllers like that for PC exist, the problem is getting people to buy them. With the Wii (U) and Switch, they're already included with the console, everyone has them, games can be made with the assumption that everyone already has the controllers, so that they can be taken full advantage of.


----------



## Worldblender (Sep 21, 2020)

Hells Malice said:


> Nintendo thrives and survives purely on its first party titles. They don't need to expand their market. And they probably never will. They barely branched into mobile despite the potential of it, so they very likely will never go to pc.



The mobile games that I have seen, while I have never touched them (and likely won't, since they are fully proprietary software, unless I can find a way to play these games 100% for free), look like to be break from the usual console stuff. The microtransactions laden in most of these games may likely turn me off of them, however. At least for the Android versions of those games, it's possible to run them on a desktop or laptop computer with http://www.android-x86.org/ or a virtual machine. If these games happen to be natively compiled for ARMv7 (32-bit) or ARMv8 (64-bit) however, things will get harder, as running in emulation or another ARM-based device with native GNU/Linux then become the only options for running these mobile games on a PC, and in the case of the former, there may be performance hit.


----------



## Kwyjor (Sep 21, 2020)

Worldblender said:


> At least for the Android versions of those games, it's possible to run them on a desktop or laptop computer with http://www.android-x86.org/ or a virtual machine. If these games happen to be natively compiled for ARMv7 (32-bit) or ARMv8 (64-bit) however, things will get harder, as running in emulation or another ARM-based device with native GNU/Linux then become the only options for running these mobile games on a PC, and in the case of the former, there may be performance hit.


Not sure about the other games, but Super Mario Run, at least, stopped supporting x86 and x86_64 processors last year.
https://supermariorun.com/en-gb/faq.html

Considering Super Mario Run requires precision inputs, it might well be an exception.


----------



## Worldblender (Sep 21, 2020)

Kwyjor said:


> Not sure about the other games, but Super Mario Run, at least, stopped supporting x86 and x86_64 processors last year.
> https://supermariorun.com/en-gb/faq.html
> 
> Considering Super Mario Run requires precision inputs, it might well be an exception.


Oh well, at least I know that one game won't run on x86 systems with the latest version. I should also mention about https://anbox.io/, that will enable running Android apps natively on GNU/Linux systems. It uses a container system (LXC) to run the Android OS, on top of the host kernel, not emulation, so it will likely give better performance. This might make it technically possible to run whatever Nintendo mobile games are published now, on GNU/Linux systems, although it's certain to not be officially supported.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 22, 2020)

Hells Malice said:


> Nintendo thrives and survives purely on its first party titles. They don't need to expand their market.



Survives? Probably (pokemon does make a lot, even if that is mostly merch).

Thrives? That is a harder sell. From where I sit their most successful consoles in terms of what will occupy the mindspace of gamers for years to come and command industries were the NES, SNES, GB, GBC, GBA and DS.
Go through their best games and most will be third party games. Nintendo did some good stuff on them (even if I did not play the GBA and DS for Nintendo efforts -- other than Advance Wars and Starfy I can leave all the Nintendo first party efforts there and still had some of the best times in gaming I have had before or since).

N64, GC, Wii, Wii U and increasingly Switch, DSi and 3ds (possibly also virtual boy but eh)... third parties had left them or were paying lip service via shovelware at best (GC maybe getting a few more contemporary offerings but still lagging). Game droughts were the order of the day (you get phrases like first party CPR for a reason). Take away the first party stuff from them and... oh dear.
The first party stuff is also looking a bit long in the tooth too if we look at the mindshare the newer efforts get and maintain as the years go on -- is anybody really still raving about Mario Kart Switch like they were Mario Kart 64 or even double dash, same for Zelda BOTW (even for those that can look past the flaws and maybe skipped out playing all the efforts in that gameplay style that we saw on the PS360) vs N64 or Wind Waker, Zelda DX and the Oracles games are legendary, how many will be able to tell me the two DS efforts without looking it up? Even the somewhat vaunted at the time link between worlds is fading rapidly.
Go another. If we asked someone to get rapid speed play through a bunch of stuff for the history of games how many would skip over the later efforts in favour of the consoles from the first paragraphs with maybe one or two (and even then maybe taken care of by other games -- personally I would do do Rare's efforts for the N64, and probably spend a lot longer going through PS1 titles).


----------



## nBow (May 23, 2021)

Taleweaver said:


> Erm...sorry, but can you point out the part where this isn't a pipe dream? Because the only arguments in your post are "other companies do it" and "I would like it". Not exactly bad ones, but not really convincing ones either.
> 
> Perhaps during the days of declining popularity in the wiiu period they would listen, but with switches selling like hotcakes, there's not much chance of them listening. Like you said: they never ported anything to PC since...well, ever. I'm not 100% sure, but they seem to follow the same approach apple doe: to be able to control the environment.
> 
> ...



This is completely wrong. Most games made on Nintendo and PC use the common game engines like UE4 and Unity. Both of these game engines already support cross platform building, meaning you don't need to completely reprogram your game for every platform you want to put it on. That's why you see all these games on every platform, it's easy. Nintendo is simply a shit company, and doesn't understand business and hasn't for a long time. They think they will/are selling more switches because all of their games are exclusive, but in reality they're selling switches because it's a portable console, and because it isn't trash like the Wii was. It has nothing to do with exclusivity. A majority of PC gamers who would play Nintendo exclusives on PC will not go out and buy a switch to do so, for the simple fact that there really is no reason to own a console if you own a PC other than playing exclusives and that's a scam, you're asking us to not only go out of our way to buy a console we'll only use sometimes but also pay premium $60 prices (that never drop) per game on that console. Nintendo nearly went bankrupt during the Wii era, and I promise you that day will come again if they don't adapt to the times. Their competitors are rapidly adapting and will more than likely start moving into becoming either a game streaming service in the future or just a PC gaming platform like steam, down the road, because you can currently build a stronger PC for less than it costs to have a less powerful console. Game streaming will inevitably replace consoles, and that's most likely when nintendo will go out of business, because they care more about securing their IP than the community that pays their checks.


----------



## Taleweaver (May 23, 2021)

nBow said:


> This is completely wrong. Most games made on Nintendo and PC use the common game engines like UE4 and Unity.


... And your source to this is what, exactly? 

Nice necrobump, by the way.


----------



## Deleted User (May 23, 2021)

Even though it's not by Nintendo's choice 99% of games on their systems can be played on PC through emulation.


----------



## Kwyjor (May 24, 2021)

nBow said:


> Nintendo is simply a shit company, and doesn't understand business and hasn't for a long time.


Really now, people have been saying that over and over again for the last 25 years.  It is tiresome.

When the company is dead and buried and they are reduced to doing nothing but making Pachinko machines, then you can say they were a "shit company".


----------



## Worldblender (May 26, 2021)

I should've mentioned this a little earlier, but not Sony has released a second of their games to PC, that being Days Gone (https://store.steampowered.com/app/1259420 via Steam, released since May 17, 2021). With this and Horizon Zero Dawn, that makes two Sony games to have been released to PC. It may not be much, but it beats Nintendo having released none of their games to PC (like some others say, emulation is the best option for Nintendo games for the time being).


----------



## Taleweaver (May 28, 2021)

Worldblender said:


> I should've mentioned this a little earlier, but not Sony has released a second of their games to PC, that being Days Gone (https://store.steampowered.com/app/1259420 via Steam, released since May 17, 2021). With this and Horizon Zero Dawn, that makes two Sony games to have been released to PC. It may not be much, but it beats Nintendo having released none of their games to PC (like some others say, emulation is the best option for Nintendo games for the time being).


Okay... So they're ahead in a race Nintendo isn't participating in.

Sorry, but my earlier response hasn't changed.


----------



## Chickenii (May 30, 2021)

Nintendo relies on first party titles to drive console sales, so I don't see them porting anything that would hurt that business model to PC for at least another generation or two.

Just emulate any of the titles on PC if you would like to play them. Most run at playable framerates on decent computers.


----------



## Viri (May 30, 2021)

Because Nintendo wants their first party stuff to stay exclusive to their own consoles. They sometimes even design their games around their own hardware. Unlike most companies, Nintendo actually makes a profit off their console sales.

If you wanna play their games, buy their console, or emulate it.


----------



## Reploid (May 30, 2021)

They have more proud and munny than sony. I mean they don't have to drag along moneypits like movie or phone department.


----------



## Jayro (May 30, 2021)

The PC has a huge problem with Piracy, which they can much better mitigate on the Switch. Long story short, it's not a cash cow, so there's no interest for them to do it.


----------



## pedro702 (May 30, 2021)

people forget that sony does alot more than sell consoles and games they have disions of all sorts of stuff same for microsoft.

Nintendo is the only one of the big 3 whose only goal and method of gaining revenue its their games, if they start putting them on pc, they wont sell consoles, if they wont sell consoles they wont sell console games, and pc games alone cant just keep nintendo afloat, not to mention they like to do wierd things with their consoles and controllers which is alot harder to make it work on Pc forma due to not everyone having the same setups/controllers and whatever.


----------



## pedro702 (May 30, 2021)

FAST6191 said:


> Survives? Probably (pokemon does make a lot, even if that is mostly merch).
> 
> Thrives? That is a harder sell. From where I sit their most successful consoles in terms of what will occupy the mindspace of gamers for years to come and command industries were the NES, SNES, GB, GBC, GBA and DS.
> Go through their best games and most will be third party games. Nintendo did some good stuff on them (even if I did not play the GBA and DS for Nintendo efforts -- other than Advance Wars and Starfy I can leave all the Nintendo first party efforts there and still had some of the best times in gaming I have had before or since).
> ...


what you consider best is up to you but by sales the best selling  top 10 games on each of those nintendo consoles are only 1st party titles with very few exceptions  so the primary focus everyone bought those consoles were 1st party titles, even nes or snes, if people only cared about 3rd partys then they would also be top sellers which they arent.

Nes top 10 all 1st party
snes Top 10 is all first party games with exception of 2 street fighter games
gb the top 10 heck 20 is all nintendo with yugioh at slot 20
gba top 20 is all nintendo with the exception of 2 pac man/namco games and one yugioh game
DS top 20 is all nintendo with exception of lego star wars and a dragon quest

So the reason this consoles sold were becuase of their exclusives and they are what keeps nintendo going foward.

if you look at sony and microsoft its a totaly diferent scenerio
xbox only 3 first party games in top 10
xbox360 only 3 first party games at top 10
xbox one 2 first party games at top 10(and im counting minecraft  lol)

ps1 5 first party games on top 10
ps2 0 first party games on top 10, yah ps2 lived on 3rd party alone.
ps3 6 first party games on top 10
ps4 4 first party games on top 10

So you see there is a very distinct difference, i dont even gonna mention nintendo consoles gc and up where is 100% first party games, but even in the old days nintendo consoles sold because of their 1st party games and has done so since their first one, while sony and microsoft are relevant to 3rd partys mostly or else their sales would be disastrous.

So yeah nintendo can live with first party titles alone basicaly and has done so since the gc and all their handhelds were basicalyjust first party machines the rest of the games were mostly a bonus at best no one bough a nintendo hanheld console without wanting to play their 1st party games.


----------



## FAST6191 (May 30, 2021)

pedro702 said:


> what you consider best is up to you but by sales the best selling  top 10 games on each of those nintendo consoles are only 1st party titles with very few exceptions  so the primary focus everyone bought those consoles were 1st party titles, even nes or snes, if people only cared about 3rd partys then they would also be top sellers which they arent.
> 
> Nes top 10 all 1st party
> snes Top 10 is all first party games with exception of 2 street fighter games
> ...



If you think you can write the history of said consoles without considering the efforts of Rare (it was not until somewhat late in the day Nintendo got a 49% stake), Capcom, Square/Enix then go right ahead. Nintendo having such things was a massive boon (I love Phantasy Star more than most but to think Sega would have not bent over backwards to get Final Fantasy on their 16 bit efforts...) and equally a massive upset come the PS1 when such things went to them. If sales numbers mean that much to you as well then the top however many after the breakaway stuff all look pretty similar, even more so if you discount a bit for some being pack in games.

I would also say I had a GB/GBC, GBA and DS for anything other than first party Nintendo efforts (other than Advance Wars and Starfy on the GBA and DS I could take or leave Nintendo's efforts, Zelda and Tetris on the older stuff I will note though -- minish cap had some nice ideas but meh execution and the less said about the DS efforts the better) and was not unique in that.


----------



## guisadop (May 30, 2021)

because nintendo thrives on artificial scarcity. porting to PC would end that scarcity.


----------



## pedro702 (May 30, 2021)

FAST6191 said:


> If you think you can write the history of said consoles without considering the efforts of Rare (it was not until somewhat late in the day Nintendo got a 49% stake), Capcom, Square/Enix then go right ahead. Nintendo having such things was a massive boon (I love Phantasy Star more than most but to think Sega would have not bent over backwards to get Final Fantasy on their 16 bit efforts...) and equally a massive upset come the PS1 when such things went to them. If sales numbers mean that much to you as well then the top however many after the breakaway stuff all look pretty similar, even more so if you discount a bit for some being pack in games.
> 
> I would also say I had a GB/GBC, GBA and DS for anything other than first party Nintendo efforts (other than Advance Wars and Starfy on the GBA and DS I could take or leave Nintendo's efforts, Zelda and Tetris on the older stuff I will note though -- minish cap had some nice ideas but meh execution and the less said about the DS efforts the better) and was not unique in that.


imo nintendo home consoles are famous becuase of mario and zelda and handheld becuase of pokemon imo.

if you ask anyone what was your favorite snes game how many people will say its a first party game be it mario world zelda link to the past or some other nintendo game?  vs saying it was final fantasy? 

They were good games alright but to anyone if you ask them any memorable game on any nintendo console you will over 90% get a nintendo 1st party awnser.

while if you ask what is your favorite ps2 game and it will probably be a gta game or something along the lines for most of the awnsers.

the thing is while there were good 3rd party games on old nintendo consoles, they werent the majority ones that sold or that were kept in people memorys imo, thats why in history if you ask anyone about best nes snes n64 game you will get alot of nintendo exclsuive games as the awnser and for me that is their console historical value.


----------

