[QUOTE="Heirren"] The name Sega Mega Drive was originally conceived to match the naming scheme of its predecessor, the Sega Master System. Since the Sega Master System was very successful in Europe (where it dominated the NES), the Mega Drive would have been a suitable name for a successor console. In North America, on the other hand, the Sega Master System was unsuccessful, so they probably made up the name "Genesis" to indicate a fresh start for Sega in the region, though that was only after legal issues prevented them from using the Mega Drive name. [QUOTE="rilpas"]well in Japan it's called the PC engine, I'm guessing they didn't want IBM to sue them :PJag85
Except that IBM couldn't even be bothered to sue all those IBM PC clone manufacturers... But I think the name has more to do with the Japanese using "computer" in a more general sense at the time, like the NES's original name "Family Computer", later shortened to Famicom.Genesis came first, because Sega wanted to beat out the NES. Yet I still believe the NES was a way better system than the Genesis simply due to the ambition to which games were made, howfar the hardware was driven and also of course because of the first party classics. Mario games have and always will beat out Sonic games over and over, and taking the history of the Sonic games vs Mario games across several systems since then, this theory only proves more and more true.
Then the SNES came along and brought us even greater classics. Yet, not only that, but the SNES was a much stronger piece of hardware than the Genesis, and could do lots more. This was plainly evident by the fact that whenever arcade ports were brought over for both systems, the SNES always had the Genesis beat - games like Street Fighter 2 and Mortal Kombat prove this. Forget the fact that Mortal Kombat for the Genesis had blood. The SNES version not only looked way better, it also played way better. The controller was also more flexible and had the capacity to handle more complicated games (I'm still wondering how SF2 and MK gamers were able to play those games on that piece of crap Genesis 3-button controller... was the Start button used as a punch button or something? Lol)
Sure, Genesis had a much more obnoxious and forceful fanboy crowd, but the SNES gamers and Nintendo themselves simply sat back and said "look, boast all you want, you and I know that the SNES has got you all beat hands down." And it did.
While I won't start going into detail about specific game genres, and if RPG's had better games on Genesis, or action games were better with the SNES. Whatever. We're talking about not only hardware here, but how each company promoted and sold their product, and of course how they maintained it throughout the system's longevity. This is not some debate like the 360 vs the PS3 (even though I personally think the 360 is crap compared to the PS3, even though the 360 has a more mainstream fanboy casual gamer crowd), because in terms of hardware, both systems are virtually identical. No, the SNES is a clear winner over the Genesis in every aspect of the hardware department, so it surprises me that this vote could put the Genesis over the SNES, even though to all gamers alike, no matter WHAT platform you have now, cannot deny that Nintendo has done more to progress the video game market than any other company ever has overall.
metalgrinch
2. The Mega Drive had a faster CPU and a larger colour palette than the SNES. The SNES was technically superior in some ways, while the Mega Drive was superior in other ways.
The bold is not true unless you mean the 32X.
I agree Sega arcades were pretty amazing back then. There may be some negative things said about their console hardware but their arcades were cutting-edge.
Log in to comment