Dear Future Gamer,

I spend most of my time building PCs, for my own small company in Norfolk, but despite this I am a great N64 fan. I'm not intending to bring up arguments about which console is better, but I'd like to remind everyone about the power of the N64.

For the past couple of years the N64 has been underestimated, mostly due to the general first-time console-buyer going for a PlayStation. I've observed that they're drawn in by the vast selection of games available for it. You've only got to go into any game store and look at the choice!

I was reading an article in GamesMaster magazine about the quality of today's games. There were two bar graphs showing the percentages of games for each console, (PS and N64) and there was a dramatic high in the section for PS games under 50 per cent.

True, Nintendo don't offer a huge selection of games, but look at the quality! An enormous majority of games for the N64 are over 70 per cent at least, and the N64 proudly holds the title for the "best game this century" - Zelda 64. Can you honestly name an original game for the PS that isn't on another platform that got over 90 per cent? I think not.

John Warwick

FG: The power of the N64 cannot be denied, nor can the quality of most of the games. That lack of software though is the major reason the PlayStation is streets ahead. You mention that there are a load of crap games out on PlayStation and you're right, there are. Sadly though, people buy crap games. Just because all the critics and anyone with any gaming taste thinks 'Cuddlything 3' is pants, it doesn't mean little Johnny in Swindon won't buy it because he's a fan of Cuddlything. He will, and he'll love it too. If the N64 had a wider range of games for people to choose, some might not be as good as Zelda or GoldenEye, and the machine would have a bigger following. Simple. As for our bias towards the PlayStation, we get accused of N64 bias, PC bias and PlayStation bias. The fact is we're not biased towards any one system.