Then and Now - Sega Genesis vs. Super Nintendo

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I don't think Star Fox would be possible on the SNES if it didn't use the Super FX chip.

Here is a list of SNES chips and games using them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Super_NES_enhancement_chips

nameless12345

I will be damned that Pilot Wings is on there, however I will say this though. What does that say about the SNES alone with out the chips? Now I agree with you 100% about Star Fox, however I donot think the games were as fast as teh Genesis Games. I donot think SOnic could run on the SNES, but then again most SNES games could not run on the Genesis. As I said the SNES did use alot of chips, granted, but I think the Genesis could prove itself on its own. I think in many instances multiplats were better on the Genesis, and others. I think the Genesis port of Earthworm Jim is better then the SNES, but then again you could and say. I am saying they were on equal levels

SNES without chips could do some mighty good graphics too as seen in Donkey Kong Country. The speed of Genesis games is not so much a matter of the CPU as is of the programing. You see the "blast-processing" which was suposedly evident in Sonic 2 was, in fact, just a trick where Sonic moved out of the visible area and gave the impression that the game was faster than it actually was. There were fast games on the SNES too. The only occasion when the Genesis really had the upper hand over the SNES were games with a lot of going on, i.e. for example with loads of enemies on screen at once or in games with multiple background layers like the Thunder Force series. I can see SNES having problems running Thunder Force IV and Thunder Force III was faster on the Genesis too. But that problem could easily be solved with aditional in-cart chips which would be used to accelerate the graphics. After all, the SNES could handle games as complex as Doom if they used the chips. Earthworm Jim may be better on the Genesis since it was developed for the Genesis and later ported over to the SNES. However, Earthworm Jim 2 was better on the SNES, as were Super Steet Fighter II, Mortal Kombat II and so on. Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had agruably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

I will be damned that Pilot Wings is on there, however I will say this though. What does that say about the SNES alone with out the chips? Now I agree with you 100% about Star Fox, however I donot think the games were as fast as teh Genesis Games. I donot think SOnic could run on the SNES, but then again most SNES games could not run on the Genesis. As I said the SNES did use alot of chips, granted, but I think the Genesis could prove itself on its own. I think in many instances multiplats were better on the Genesis, and others. I think the Genesis port of Earthworm Jim is better then the SNES, but then again you could and say. I am saying they were on equal levels

Darkman2007

SNES without chips could do some mighty good graphics too as seen in Donkey Kong Country. The speed of Genesis games is not so much a matter of the CPU as is of the programing. You see the "blast-processing" which was suposedly evident in Sonic 2 was, in fact, just a trick where Sonic moved out of the visible area and gave the impression that the game was faster than it actually was. There were fast games on the SNES too. The only occasion when the Genesis really had the upper hand over the SNES were games with a lot of going on, i.e. for example with loads of enemies on screen at once or in games with multiple background layers like the Thunder Force series. I can see SNES having problems running Thunder Force IV and Thunder Force III was faster on the Genesis too. But that problem could easily be solved with aditional in-cart chips which would be used to accelerate the graphics. After all, the SNES could handle games as complex as Doom if they used the chips. Earthworm Jim may be better on the Genesis since it was developed for the Genesis and later ported over to the SNES. However, Earthworm Jim 2 was better on the SNES, as were Super Steet Fighter II, Mortal Kombat II and so on. Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had agruably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.

Sonic 3D Blast doesn't look bad for Genesis but I don't think it looks better than DKC.

Then again, you got Vectorman. That had a little sparse graphics but ran like a charm.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

I will be damned that Pilot Wings is on there, however I will say this though. What does that say about the SNES alone with out the chips? Now I agree with you 100% about Star Fox, however I donot think the games were as fast as teh Genesis Games. I donot think SOnic could run on the SNES, but then again most SNES games could not run on the Genesis. As I said the SNES did use alot of chips, granted, but I think the Genesis could prove itself on its own. I think in many instances multiplats were better on the Genesis, and others. I think the Genesis port of Earthworm Jim is better then the SNES, but then again you could and say. I am saying they were on equal levels

Darkman2007

SNES without chips could do some mighty good graphics too as seen in Donkey Kong Country. The speed of Genesis games is not so much a matter of the CPU as is of the programing. You see the "blast-processing" which was suposedly evident in Sonic 2 was, in fact, just a trick where Sonic moved out of the visible area and gave the impression that the game was faster than it actually was. There were fast games on the SNES too. The only occasion when the Genesis really had the upper hand over the SNES were games with a lot of going on, i.e. for example with loads of enemies on screen at once or in games with multiple background layers like the Thunder Force series. I can see SNES having problems running Thunder Force IV and Thunder Force III was faster on the Genesis too. But that problem could easily be solved with aditional in-cart chips which would be used to accelerate the graphics. After all, the SNES could handle games as complex as Doom if they used the chips. Earthworm Jim may be better on the Genesis since it was developed for the Genesis and later ported over to the SNES. However, Earthworm Jim 2 was better on the SNES, as were Super Steet Fighter II, Mortal Kombat II and so on. Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had agruably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.

Yep your absolutley right. DKC did not use a chip, what it did use was a compression technique. I mentioned this earlier, but I will say it again is taht the thing with Donkey Kong Country is that it did not need any chip. The Stampers used high SGI Computers, and they used compression technique called ACM(Advanced Computer Modeling) which in essence is compression not hardware.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

SNES without chips could do some mighty good graphics too as seen in Donkey Kong Country. The speed of Genesis games is not so much a matter of the CPU as is of the programing. You see the "blast-processing" which was suposedly evident in Sonic 2 was, in fact, just a trick where Sonic moved out of the visible area and gave the impression that the game was faster than it actually was. There were fast games on the SNES too. The only occasion when the Genesis really had the upper hand over the SNES were games with a lot of going on, i.e. for example with loads of enemies on screen at once or in games with multiple background layers like the Thunder Force series. I can see SNES having problems running Thunder Force IV and Thunder Force III was faster on the Genesis too. But that problem could easily be solved with aditional in-cart chips which would be used to accelerate the graphics. After all, the SNES could handle games as complex as Doom if they used the chips. Earthworm Jim may be better on the Genesis since it was developed for the Genesis and later ported over to the SNES. However, Earthworm Jim 2 was better on the SNES, as were Super Steet Fighter II, Mortal Kombat II and so on. Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had agruably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.

TheTrueMagusX1

Yep your absolutley right. DKC did not use a chip, what it did use was a compression technique. I mentioned this earlier, but I will say it again is taht the thing with Donkey Kong Country is that it did not need any chip. The Stampers used high SGI Computers, and they used compression technique called ACM(Advanced Computer Modeling) which in essence is compression not hardware.

Well it's not so simple. Things like animations, background layers, colors and some special effects still had to be calculated by the SNES.

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] DKC was done with pre renderd graphics, other then the colour count, the Mega Drive could have probably done a similar thing.nameless12345

Yep your absolutley right. DKC did not use a chip, what it did use was a compression technique. I mentioned this earlier, but I will say it again is taht the thing with Donkey Kong Country is that it did not need any chip. The Stampers used high SGI Computers, and they used compression technique called ACM(Advanced Computer Modeling) which in essence is compression not hardware.

Well it's not so simple. Things like animations, background layers, colors and some special effects still had to be calculated by the SNES.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

Yep your absolutley right. DKC did not use a chip, what it did use was a compression technique. I mentioned this earlier, but I will say it again is taht the thing with Donkey Kong Country is that it did not need any chip. The Stampers used high SGI Computers, and they used compression technique called ACM(Advanced Computer Modeling) which in essence is compression not hardware.

Darkman2007

Well it's not so simple. Things like animations, background layers, colors and some special effects still had to be calculated by the SNES.

Exactly. The Sega Genesis/Mega Drive could do alot of things that the SNES could. The SNES had a slower CPU as opposed to the Genesis. And also the arguments about chips, well the Genesis could do the same, be enhanced by it, though there was only one game that did that, and that was Virtua Racing. None the less, the Genesis had its own merits and could do alot more then some people give it credit for.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

Yep your absolutley right. DKC did not use a chip, what it did use was a compression technique. I mentioned this earlier, but I will say it again is taht the thing with Donkey Kong Country is that it did not need any chip. The Stampers used high SGI Computers, and they used compression technique called ACM(Advanced Computer Modeling) which in essence is compression not hardware.

Darkman2007

Well it's not so simple. Things like animations, background layers, colors and some special effects still had to be calculated by the SNES.

Genesis' answer to DKC was Vectorman. Vectorman looked no where near as colorful as DKC, but it had multiple background layers and ran fast.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well it's not so simple. Things like animations, background layers, colors and some special effects still had to be calculated by the SNES.

nameless12345

Genesis' answer to DKC was Vectorman. Vectorman looked no where near as colorful as DKC, but it had multiple background layers and ran fast.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] and most of those things could have also been done on the Mega DriveDarkman2007

Genesis' answer to DKC was Vectorman. Vectorman looked no where near as colorful as DKC, but it had multiple background layers and ran fast.

Actually DKC made it over to the Genesis in unlicensed form:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqKMHCaEurI

:D

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Genesis' answer to DKC was Vectorman. Vectorman looked no where near as colorful as DKC, but it had multiple background layers and ran fast.

nameless12345

Actually DKC made it over to the Genesis in unlicensed form:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqKMHCaEurI

:D

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] I would have liked to see how DKC would have looked if it was developed by Rare for the MD, but of course that would not happen.Darkman2007

Actually DKC made it over to the Genesis in unlicensed form:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqKMHCaEurI

:D

Also Pirated games donot have the same techniques or equipment that liscensed games have to them...

That does not count! :lol:

Now here is an example of something that shows a game that gets close to being like donkey kong (doom troopers)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLK0GegBk2Q.

The Super Nintendo version was not as good, but I dont think it is because the genesis had better hardware, it all depends on which version they want to focus attention on... So a lot of these debates with game comparisons are not telling the truth. Imagine if the graphics were brighter, I am sure it would look like donkey kong.

Then: SNES

Now: Mega Drive/Genesis

I originally sold my Mega Drive to buy a SNES and never regretted it at the time, games like Street Fighter 2 Turbo, F-Zero, Zombies and Super Mario World etc seemed amazing to me at the time. Mega Drive was probably on it's way downwards around that time as well and the SNES seemed to just be able to offer so much more and had new games on the horizon to interest me, plus my mates who played games pretty much all had a SNES so you'd hear and talk about SNES games far more. I bought other big name games like Super Metroid (hated it frankly and kept getting lost unless I used a guide, and using guides instantly ruins any game, but since everyone adores it I was possibly too young to appreciate it, not yet gone back to retry it) and Link to the Past (like most Zelda games I eventually got bored/lost/stuck and dropped it - again, maybe too young, though I still get bored about half way through on the new ones), but there were plenty of top games for the SNES and most of games that were available on both platforms, were better on the SNES.

Now my attitude is completely different, I have a Mega Drive hooked up to a TV and play it frequently, regularly buying more games for it off ebay, mostly games I missed out on as a kid or even ones I'd never heard of before. Loads of top games you can just pick up and play even if you only have a couple of minutes to spare. I don't have a SNES now, so I just get SNES games on the Virtual Console - it's still a great system with loads of ace games on it, but games like Mario World and the original Mario Kart have lost a bit of their appeal for me now, new games I tried out such as Mario RPG and Super Castlevania, while being impressive still somehow didn't keep me interested (despite being of obvious high quality). The SNES version of Zombies is far better though, and the SNES F-Zero is still the best game in that series imo. I still play the SNES games a reasonable amount on the VC, but I prefer the Mega Drive for the type of games it offers, the joypad (which is my favourite of all time), the music in the games (not a fan of the way many SNES games sounded) and just the 'feel' of many of the games.

I think I was right to prefer the SNES at the time, but for what I want now, the Mega Drive is far more suitable for me.

Yeah this is how Segas down spiral effected the popularity of the genesis, the snes did have have two heads attached to one body *shrugs at thought. So a lot of games got forgotten, hell even toejam and earl would of just been a lost grave if it was not for sonic. I think nintendo was better at marketting for sure, sega kind of does these erroneous smears of the snes. That seemed to either make sega look crazy, or are contradictory. I have the same feelings towards super metroid and zelda, really great games, but you have to play it so much, and if you stop... They are basically games for geeks, because only geeks would want to just play one game for hours on end. I prefer some variety. So I guess that is why the Snes does not count as the best for me, even if the games are top quality, the nature of their game is not appealing to me. At the same time I bet some people do not like the fast paced gaming of the sega genesis. I have never been into rpgs, fighters, super metroid is a rpg, and so is zelda. Not a pure rpg, but close.

Here is an example that shows the real difference, Cool Spot. I mean the graphics on the snes is better, right? Well that may be, but they are also different, and the game plays differently. I noticed that the super nintendo trieds to use more "kiddish" colors, also the game is easier, it is easier to hop from one balloon to another. And the sound is "softer" on the snes, more high pitched.

I think Sega was focusing too much on the hardware which ultimatley led to their downfall. For example Master System was already twice faster than NES, but they had to to make the 16-bit Genesis to win the US game market (Master System was doing good in Europe by the way). And when SNES launched, they felt the need to show how "superior" Genesis is by advertising the "blast-processing", which ultimatley led to the (false) belief that Genesis is stronger than SNES (the SNES was technically a lot better except for the CPU speed). And they made the Sega CD, which had superior sound, storage, FVM and scaling capabilites. But that was not enough and they made another add-on for the Genesis (32X) despite Sega CD's mediocre sales. At the time Sega also released the Sega Saturn in Japan, which soon came out in the US and they dropped support for the 32X quickly. At the time, Sega didn't understand that better hardware doesn't necessairly mean better games and this cost them a lot. They also advertised the Saturn as "twice the processing power" of PS1, but noone really cared except for die-hard Sega fans. The PS1 just had faster, more advanced 3D games and a way bigger library of games.

I think Sega was focusing too much on the hardware which ultimatley led to their downfall. For example Master System was already twice faster than NES, but they had to to make the 16-bit Genesis to win the US game market (Master System was doing good in Europe by the way). And when SNES launched, they felt the need to show how "superior" Genesis is by advertising the "blast-processing", which ultimatley led to the (false) belief that Genesis is stronger than SNES (the SNES was technically a lot better except for the CPU speed). And they made the Sega CD, which had superior sound, storage, FVM and scaling capabilites. But that was not enough and they made another add-on for the Genesis (32X) despite Sega CD's mediocre sales. At the time Sega also released the Sega Saturn in Japan, which soon came out in the US and they dropped support for the 32X quickly. At the time, Sega didn't understand that better hardware doesn't necessairly mean better games and this cost them a lot. They also advertised the Saturn as "twice the processing power" of PS1, but noone really cared except for die-hard Sega fans. The PS1 just had faster, more advanced 3D games and a way bigger library of games.

nameless12345

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I think Sega was focusing too much on the hardware which ultimatley led to their downfall. For example Master System was already twice faster than NES, but they had to to make the 16-bit Genesis to win the US game market (Master System was doing good in Europe by the way). And when SNES launched, they felt the need to show how "superior" Genesis is by advertising the "blast-processing", which ultimatley led to the (false) belief that Genesis is stronger than SNES (the SNES was technically a lot better except for the CPU speed). And they made the Sega CD, which had superior sound, storage, FVM and scaling capabilites. But that was not enough and they made another add-on for the Genesis (32X) despite Sega CD's mediocre sales. At the time Sega also released the Sega Saturn in Japan, which soon came out in the US and they dropped support for the 32X quickly. At the time, Sega didn't understand that better hardware doesn't necessairly mean better games and this cost them a lot. They also advertised the Saturn as "twice the processing power" of PS1, but noone really cared except for die-hard Sega fans. The PS1 just had faster, more advanced 3D games and a way bigger library of games.

Darkman2007

Well, the Mega CD was supposed to compete with PC Engine CD. But because PC Engine CD wasn't really popular in the US, it had to compete with the SNES. It did bring superior sound and scaling capabilites and far more stroage but it didn't fix the low color issue. It sold well enough for a add-on, but it wasn't a success. Even Sega felt like that. And I don't think it's smart to compare the Mega CD to 64DD because that came out only in Japan and saw only a limited release. Saturn could push more polys than PS1, but couldn't do some of the effects PS1 could and had arguably worse 3D performance.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I think Sega was focusing too much on the hardware which ultimatley led to their downfall. For example Master System was already twice faster than NES, but they had to to make the 16-bit Genesis to win the US game market (Master System was doing good in Europe by the way). And when SNES launched, they felt the need to show how "superior" Genesis is by advertising the "blast-processing", which ultimatley led to the (false) belief that Genesis is stronger than SNES (the SNES was technically a lot better except for the CPU speed). And they made the Sega CD, which had superior sound, storage, FVM and scaling capabilites. But that was not enough and they made another add-on for the Genesis (32X) despite Sega CD's mediocre sales. At the time Sega also released the Sega Saturn in Japan, which soon came out in the US and they dropped support for the 32X quickly. At the time, Sega didn't understand that better hardware doesn't necessairly mean better games and this cost them a lot. They also advertised the Saturn as "twice the processing power" of PS1, but noone really cared except for die-hard Sega fans. The PS1 just had faster, more advanced 3D games and a way bigger library of games.

Darkman2007

The Saturn was a bit more powerful. I agree that the Sega CD/Mega CD had a couple of years on the market with some solid games on it. The 32X as Nameless said came out far too close to the Saturn release to even be useful. I want to add too about the Saturn, is that people mistake that the Saturn died prematurley due to the hardware. THat is not true, what killed it was some very very bad marketing moves by Sega. Sure the console was hard to develop, but as I said Sega Made some bad movies. An example was its badly done launch....Sega was to release the Saturn in September of 1995. However at E3 1995, the very fist E3 sega came on stage and made the announcement that the Saturn had already shipped to stores. This was May of 1995, and Sega did not tell anyone this at all. So people who got the Saturn at launch had no games since no third party developers knew of this, and it seemed to be a last minute move.

The problem with Sega was not hardware, they had comparable and strong hardware in the Genesis, Sega CD, The Saturn, and even the 32X. The problem though was pricing, timing and just bad marketing on the part of sega. Those were the issues. Sega did make good hardware, they just were poor marketers and bad at timing.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I think Sega was focusing too much on the hardware which ultimatley led to their downfall. For example Master System was already twice faster than NES, but they had to to make the 16-bit Genesis to win the US game market (Master System was doing good in Europe by the way). And when SNES launched, they felt the need to show how "superior" Genesis is by advertising the "blast-processing", which ultimatley led to the (false) belief that Genesis is stronger than SNES (the SNES was technically a lot better except for the CPU speed). And they made the Sega CD, which had superior sound, storage, FVM and scaling capabilites. But that was not enough and they made another add-on for the Genesis (32X) despite Sega CD's mediocre sales. At the time Sega also released the Sega Saturn in Japan, which soon came out in the US and they dropped support for the 32X quickly. At the time, Sega didn't understand that better hardware doesn't necessairly mean better games and this cost them a lot. They also advertised the Saturn as "twice the processing power" of PS1, but noone really cared except for die-hard Sega fans. The PS1 just had faster, more advanced 3D games and a way bigger library of games.

nameless12345

Well, the Mega CD was supposed to compete with PC Engine CD. But because PC Engine CD wasn't really popular in the US, it had to compete with the SNES. It did bring superior sound and scaling capabilites and far more stroage but it didn't fix the low color issue. It sold well enough for a add-on, but it wasn't a success. Even Sega felt like that. And I don't think it's smart to compare the Mega CD to 64DD because that came out only in Japan and saw only a limited release. Saturn could push more polys than PS1, but couldn't do some of the effects PS1 could and had arguably worse 3D performance.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] 32X was a mistake I would have to admit, Mega CD?........less so , because it wasn't considerd a next gen system, nor was it advertised as such., its really no different then the N64DD , or the Famicom Disk System, its just that the Mega CD probably had more support (at least more then the 64DD, not sure about the FDS) the blast processing ads were a US only thing btw, it was never advertised like that anywhere else. and technically the Saturn is a more powerful system both in 2D and 3D, harder to make games for maybe, but not weaker.Darkman2007

Well, the Mega CD was supposed to compete with PC Engine CD. But because PC Engine CD wasn't really popular in the US, it had to compete with the SNES. It did bring superior sound and scaling capabilites and far more stroage but it didn't fix the low color issue. It sold well enough for a add-on, but it wasn't a success. Even Sega felt like that. And I don't think it's smart to compare the Mega CD to 64DD because that came out only in Japan and saw only a limited release. Saturn could push more polys than PS1, but couldn't do some of the effects PS1 could and had arguably worse 3D performance.

Yep if that was the problem with the Mega/Sega CD, then why was that not a problem on the PCE CD? Just curious as that I found alot of original games on the PCE CD as opposed to the Sega CD, however the PCE CD has a far bigger library than the Sega CD.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well, the Mega CD was supposed to compete with PC Engine CD. But because PC Engine CD wasn't really popular in the US, it had to compete with the SNES. It did bring superior sound and scaling capabilites and far more stroage but it didn't fix the low color issue. It sold well enough for a add-on, but it wasn't a success. Even Sega felt like that. And I don't think it's smart to compare the Mega CD to 64DD because that came out only in Japan and saw only a limited release. Saturn could push more polys than PS1, but couldn't do some of the effects PS1 could and had arguably worse 3D performance.

TheTrueMagusX1

Yep if that was the problem with the Mega/Sega CD, then why was that not a problem on the PCE CD? Just curious as that I found alot of original games on the PCE CD as opposed to the Sega CD, however the PCE CD has a far bigger library than the Sega CD.

[QUOTE="TheTrueMagusX1"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] My main issue with the Mega CD is that developers weren't really sure what to do , and just either released slightly enhanced versions of their cartridge games, or just made FMV games. the system still has some nice games though. as for PS1 and Saturn , it really was just about which system the game was designed for. games that were first on the PS1 like Wipeout and Destruction Derby were better on the PS1, games that were made for the Saturn like Grandia and Dead or Alive (arcade first, but that would make the PS1 version a port of a port) , were better on the Saturn. Saturn could do alot of these effects in software (because of the extra processing power), I can name more then a few games that have lighting effects and similar things in them. the problem was , that took extra time to code, which most developers didn't bother with.Darkman2007

Yep if that was the problem with the Mega/Sega CD, then why was that not a problem on the PCE CD? Just curious as that I found alot of original games on the PCE CD as opposed to the Sega CD, however the PCE CD has a far bigger library than the Sega CD.

Your right about that. The only Japanese FMV game I can think of actually is Time Gal, that QTE game thats exactly like Dragons Lair that came from Taito. Not to mention that some of the original fmv games as well that were not rereleases were trash, like make your own video with marky mark and trash like that. I also think that timing had alot to do with it. THe PCE CD came out I believe in 1989, or 1988, something like that, and the Sega CD came in 92 or 93 so there was not much time for them to be relevant where as the PCE CD had that time to be relevant.

Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had arguably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.nameless12345

Genesis scaling and miscellaneous

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAGXJE1krqY&feature=related#t=2m37s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x01qwb2pwTY#t=0m44s

Genesis rotation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_7Nl9rODLQ&feature=related#t=4m16s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG8rV81-KXc&feature=related#t=3m25s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6F8BK69x6o#t=10m48s

Axelay similar effect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9tuVsuWVC4#t=2m1s

Multi segmented boss

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbXW7NAt_zY&feature=related#t=5m22s

3D effect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Efh2Mbygtw#t=4m58s

Pre-Rendered (like DKC, but this is only proof of concept as the game isn't anywhere near as good)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR2g0CeS5OQ#t=7m11s

Lighting effects

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHnlILVhqm8#t=3m50s

All of this stuff is done with the stock Genesis hardware, whilst, as has already been established a lot of the SNES games, (even earlier ones like Pilotwings and Super Mario Kart) have onboard chips in the cartridges to help the hardware.

So yeah, the SNES has better colour capabilities with a much bigger pallet and a higher onscreen number, and hardware effects such as scaling and rotation, but the Genesis can use its extra CPU power to recreate the hardware effects where required (though I've neverseen the entire screen rotate like it does in some SNES games), and when they're not required the extra CPU grunt can be used for other things, Genesis also has a higher native resolution than the SNES most Genesis games are 320x224, whilst most SNES games are 256x224. I do think the SNES sound chip is much better though (although, again, some certain circumstances can have the Genesis one coming out better)

Wow... That is a lot, I was surprised by red zone 0_o. I guess we can all agree they really were not using the Genesis to its fullest.

Nintendo fan boys don't need to brag too much. But SEGA fans don't need to make too many excuses. If it wasn't for the Genesis, there probably wouldn't be a SNES at the time. Competition made both of these systems great. Super Mario World and Chrono Trigger were great games for the SNES, but Sonic and EA Sports were great games for the Genesis. I actually prefered Sonic over Mario, but I'll still admit that both consoles were great with good games for both systems. Unfortunately SEGA made a dumb mistake and worried way too much about its hardware rather than the games, and ended up suffering in the long run. Truth is, they were winning, and all they had to do was just sit back and keep pumping out those great games they were known for... BUT they did everything and screwed everything up not just for that console war, but the upcoming generations. SO they pretty much destroyed themselves.

It would be pure fanboyism to try and say one system is "way better" than the other. Both systems did something better than the other, but they were great. They are both great systems, and your preference will make which one is better to you and thats all that should matter.

THEN: Sega Genesis

Why?Before then, I had another console. It was the NES, great system no doubt, just too unreliable aka bending the 72-pin connector back in place. Then I would have to open my NES every few months because those little clips would fall apart. Besides, I was ready for a whole new system so I decided to give Sega a chance. Altered Beast, Golden Axe, Road Rash, Rocket Knight Adventure, Shining Force, Gunstar Heroes, Contra Hard Corps, Streets of Rage, Comix Zone, Phantasy Star 4, Ristar, Vectorman, Sonic, Shinobi 3, etc. I don't know, Sega just had more appealing games. Plus the controller rocked. The SNES controller, while well designed and a perfect fit for thekids (or petite guys and gals), didn'twork withme well.. and with myhands, I tend to get cramps if I wereplaying for 3 or more hours.. whereas I can play using myGenesis controller all night without so much as a numbing sensation.

NOW: Sega Genesis

Why? Well, Genesis was certainly a console to get back then, and is certainly a great console to collect now. There was no owning a SNES and a Genesis, you either owned one or the other. You can't own a fat plumber and a blue hedgehog, it's being greedy.Besides, I didn't have the extra spending cash for it.I would eventually get a Super NES, and while they had tons of great games, I just felt that Genesis had more fun games, that's all. Both systems had awesome games though.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]Genesis and SNES weren't equal when it comes to tech. SNES could display more colors, more advanced effects (like Mode 7), supported in-cart chips (Genesis only did this for Virtua Racing) and had arguably better sound. The only thing where Genesis was better was, like stated before, the CPU speed.Domino_slayer

Genesis scaling and miscellaneous

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAGXJE1krqY&feature=related#t=2m37s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x01qwb2pwTY#t=0m44s

Genesis rotation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_7Nl9rODLQ&feature=related#t=4m16s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG8rV81-KXc&feature=related#t=3m25s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6F8BK69x6o#t=10m48s

Axelay similar effect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9tuVsuWVC4#t=2m1s

Multi segmented boss

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbXW7NAt_zY&feature=related#t=5m22s

3D effect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Efh2Mbygtw#t=4m58s

Pre-Rendered (like DKC, but this is only proof of concept as the game isn't anywhere near as good)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR2g0CeS5OQ#t=7m11s

Lighting effects

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHnlILVhqm8#t=3m50s

All of this stuff is done with the stock Genesis hardware, whilst, as has already been established a lot of the SNES games, (even earlier ones like Pilotwings and Super Mario Kart) have onboard chips in the cartridges to help the hardware.

So yeah, the SNES has better colour capabilities with a much bigger pallet and a higher onscreen number, and hardware effects such as scaling and rotation, but the Genesis can use its extra CPU power to recreate the hardware effects where required (though I've neverseen the entire screen rotate like it does in some SNES games), and when they're not required the extra CPU grunt can be used for other things, Genesis also has a higher native resolution than the SNES most Genesis games are 320x224, whilst most SNES games are 256x224. I do think the SNES sound chip is much better though (although, again, some certain circumstances can have the Genesis one coming out better)

It's mostly FM synthesis.You cannot compare them do the SNES.Although the GENESIS is highly capable of producing sampled effects it only have a few sampling channels one is the DAC and the other is on the six sound channel but it often make the DAC sound horrible.Besides FM synthesis have an advatage since you don't have to waste cartridge space and a lot instruments so they often have smaller cartridges.

Tri tri TRIPPPLLEE POST!!!:P

I went to gamers to get Red Zone, also found sub terranium, then I saw Steel tallons as I was browsing. Looks like another game that is sort of like star fox.

steel tallons,Though... Starfox is more interesting. I am convinced that nintendo simply had more resources than sega did, remember Segas only way to beat nintendo was through sonic. Sega was the underdog.... Who decided when they finally were successful to just RUIN EVERYTHING!!!

Tri tri TRIPPPLLEE POST!!!:P

I went to gamers to get Red Zone, also found sub terranium, then I saw Steel tallons as I was browsing. Looks like another game that is sort of like star fox.

steel tallons,Though... Starfox is more interesting. I am convinced that nintendo simply had more resources than sega did, remember Segas only way to beat nintendo was through sonic. Sega was the underdog.... Who decided when they finally were successful to just RUIN EVERYTHING!!!

mahlasor

In 1994 Sega were putting all of their advertising into the 32X, its games, and Sonic and Knuckles, whilst Nintendo put theirs into Super Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, and a whole load of other games. Taking Sega's shift of emphasis to 32X into account, and the earlier move to Saturn (N64 came later for Nintendo) its not surprising that a lot of good latter day Genesis games started to fall through the cracks of public awareness.

I still think that splitting Sonic 3 into two games was another big error for Sega, it weakened Sonic 3, and the "Sonic and Knuckles" half came too soon for the public to take it seriously, had they just released the two games together in one cartridge as originally intended it would've been much better competition for Donkey Kong Country, and wouldn't have made the public think that Sega was churning out Sonic releases just to make a quick buck.

Yup, I think all the pieces are finally coming together. Now I have two new games, Red zone, and subterrania, I remember staring at red zone and not caring, ironically the two games have the same title type. I like how red zone makes a point to say "rotating background graphics and textures, 3d vector sprite objects and polygon graphics, realtime zoom, full motion video compression, and all running without the use of additional hardware. As if that was put there so when people discuss whether the snes was just way better than the genesis; people can just let loose this message.

My first system as a kid was the SNES, and I absolutely loved it. I could not get enough of Super Mario World, Super Mario Kart, Super Mario All-stars, the super star wars games and the list could go on and on.

I always wished however I had a Genesis, at the time, it was the cool system to have. And I always wanted to play all the sega exclusive games, such as all the sonic games, streets of rage, Vectorman, etc. I always felt i missed out on those game. Most of my friends also had the SNES, so I never got to play the genesis mush as a kid.

It wasn't until sega released the sonic collection and sonic gem games, that I really got to play through all the sonic games, and I was very impressed.

I am just curious if other growing up had the SNES, but thought the genesis system at the time was the cooler system to own

Lol, I think the Genesis fans won the ultimate debate, this thread should be stickied, so further snes versus genesis threads dont need to be used. So much is discussed.

Tri tri TRIPPPLLEE POST!!!:P

I went to gamers to get Red Zone, also found sub terranium, then I saw Steel tallons as I was browsing. Looks like another game that is sort of like star fox.

steel tallons,Though... Starfox is more interesting. I am convinced that nintendo simply had more resources than sega did, remember Segas only way to beat nintendo was through sonic. Sega was the underdog.... Who decided when they finally were successful to just RUIN EVERYTHING!!!

mahlasor

Steel Tallons on the Genesis was almost unplaylable. Real 3D games in general were too slow on the 16-bit consoles and they needed to give them special in-cart 3D acceleration chips (like the SNES Super FX and Genesis SVP) to get a playlable framerate. Also Star Fox was based on Starglider.

Also I don't understand why you think that Genesis fans won this debate. Many Genesis fans think both consoles were good and had their good and bad sides, and many SNES fans think so too. I first got a Genesis (Mega Drive over here), mainly because of Sonic, and I got a SNES later and I started to think that Nintendo is way better, but after years I returned back to Sega and I now know that Sega was just as important for gaming as Nintendo was. Overall, the Nintendo vs Sega times were imo the best period in gaming. PC games were great back then too.

The debate of whether the snes was truely WAY above the Genesis. Anyways didnt think to look at the full video of steel talons, how did that get released? Red Steel has full 3D, and it has no frame issues.

Like I said, 3D polygon games on the SNES and Genesis were horribly slow without any 3D acceleration in-cart chips or other add-ons (like the 32X). There was a handful of 3D games without chips on the SNES and Genesis and they all ran super slow, like 5 frames per second at average. Nintendo's solution was the Super FX in-cart chip which accelerated the 3D graphics, while Sega's solution was the SVP chip, also used for 3D acceleration, and later the 32X add-on which had two seperate processors.

Here you can read about them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_FX

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Virtua_Processor

They both provided impressive 3D graphics for these two mainly 2D machines.

Red zone does it without additional hardware, if that is what you mean. Funny how it makes a point to say that in the second screen.

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"]

Honestly I dont understand the people who only played sonic 2 on their genesis and conclude that the SNES is a better system. Sonic isnt even close to being the top game for the genesis.. That system has a BIGGER library than the super nintendo by a large margine, the difference is that you have to look.. They were always weird off beat games with awkward names which is why they went under the radar... but when you played them youd realize how unqiue is library was which is why I prefer the system imo.

Calling total shennanigans on that. Genesis' library is only bigger if you don't count games released in Japan, and even then is exactly 132 games larger, and considering both systems had between 700-100 games, that's really a marginal difference of ~10%. So much bigger? Not really. And I don't think they gave much competition quality-wise... However, in Japan you had almost twice the titles that Sega had. Oops. Even some of the cooler Sega titles, such as the Jungle Strike series, etc. made their way to both systems so I don't see how you can claim Sega even had an edge in that.

However, some of the best games ever, NOT on the Genesis:

-Secret of Mana (and the Japanese sequels)

-U.N. Squadron

-Chrono Trigger

-Final Fantasy II/III

-Ken Griffey Jr. Homerun Derby

-A lot of Megaman games

-Super Mario RPG

And many, many, more. Case closed.

What really pissed me off about Nintendo is their butchering policy when it came to censorship and applying "family-friendly" atmosphere to the market here in the US. While not asbad as it was back in the NES day (in which everything that could be construed as religious.. like a cross in a graveyard, was altered or straight up erased), the SNES years featured a lot of content slaughtering in the name of Nintendo's misguided appeal to everyone being able to play their games without getting offended by violence or adult content. Final Fight is a prime example - all the booze items were removed, the female foes converted into sissy men, and names like Damnd and Sodom changed to Thrasher and Katana. Sonic Blastman had its female enemies entirely removed, and Final Fight II had a boss who was supposed to carry a knife come out bare-handed. Everyone remembers how outraged they were to find their SNES version of Mortal Kombat sterilized.. with "sweat" replacing blood and the fatalities turning PG-13. - resulting in people buying up the Genesis version in droves even though it was inferior audio and graphics wise to the SNES version.Apparently Nintendo thought that Mortal Kombat was a highly competent 2D fighter that would be fun to play with or without the graphic violence. Well, they were completely wrong; Mortal Kombat was all about the blood.The miscalculation further helped to reaffirm Sega's claims that the Genesis had attitude and the Super Nintendo was for little kids or crybabies. It wasn't just the guts and risque female outfits getting touched up.. mature dialogue was re-translated (like Final Fantasy VI's vague suicide reference and the heavily sanitized mention of sex.

Other than that, SNES is still a great system. I wish that Nintendo put as much effort into their later devices, as even with a number of great games being assigned to the 64, Gamecube, and Wii.. none of them display the dominance in title libraries and overall gamer appreciation that reigned during the 16-bit era.

I had both and played them both to death, though I can safely say I think I played Genesis more back then.

Why?: Because I had Sega Channel, nuff said.

What really pissed me off about Nintendo is their butchering policy when it came to censorship and applying "family-friendly" atmosphere to the market here in the US. While not asbad as it was back in the NES day (in which everything that could be construed as religious.. like a cross in a graveyard, was altered or straight up erased), the SNES years featured a lot of content slaughtering in the name of Nintendo's misguided appeal to everyone being able to play their games without getting offended by violence or adult content. Final Fight is a prime example - all the booze items were removed, the female foes converted into sissy men, and names like Damnd and Sodom changed to Thrasher and Katana. Sonic Blastman had its female enemies entirely removed, and Final Fight II had a boss who was supposed to carry a knife come out bare-handed. Everyone remembers how outraged they were to find their SNES version of Mortal Kombat sterilized.. with "sweat" replacing blood and the fatalities turning PG-13. - resulting in people buying up the Genesis version in droves even though it was inferior audio and graphics wise to the SNES version.Apparently Nintendo thought that Mortal Kombat was a highly competent 2D fighter that would be fun to play with or without the graphic violence. Well, they were completely wrong; Mortal Kombat was all about the blood.The miscalculation further helped to reaffirm Sega's claims that the Genesis had attitude and the Super Nintendo was for little kids or crybabies. It wasn't just the guts and risque female outfits getting touched up.. mature dialogue was re-translated (like Final Fantasy VI's vague suicide reference and the heavily sanitized mention of sex.

tainted_lynx

That's true, Nintendo had a strict censorship policy back in the NES and early SNES days. For example the Nazi symbols in Bionic Commando were removed in the US version, same with Wolfenstein 3D. And they also removed all the blood in games like Wolfenstein 3D and Mortal Kombat. However, when the ESRB was formed, Nintendo abandoned their censorship policy and games like Mortal Kombat II and Doom weren't censored. Third parties were free to make games as they wanted. For example Duke Nukem 64 on the N64 was censored by the publisher, not Nintendo.

I still have a Super Nintendo console and 27 games. I've bought 6 Super NES consoles in my lifetime. End up selling to SNES only to just end up getting another one.

Back in the Sega Genesis Vs Super Nintendo. didn't matter to me since I had both consoles. So the console war of then or today don't mean much to me personally. since I like videogames in general. Just Cheer for your favorite console of all time. For me it is the SNES never have I put so many hours into gaming on that console. But I was younger too.

[QUOTE="TerragonSix"]

Back in the day, if you were old enough and remembered, this was an all-out war between these two consoles. And, it did get a little nasty. I can still remember SEGA's commercial about how the genesis was the 'cool' console. It was a heated rivalry that seemed to mirror onto the people who played them. This is not an argument thread on what is better and why, but rather, a comparison of how you felt about the subject then, and how you feel now.

For example:

THEN: Super Nintendo

Why? Christmas gift, aside from Sonic, Genesis never really did it for me. Controller felt awkward with the three button in a row configuration.

NOW: Super Nintendo

Why? I can name a whole lot more C-L-A-S-S-I-C (wtf is up with a forbidden html error? lol) titles on the SNES than I can with the Genesis.

Emerald_Warrior

I'm different here. SNES and Genesis were probably my two favorite consoles of all-time. Well, Genesis and NES are awfully close in my book I really can't decide 2nd place between the two. Nonetheless, they are both awesome. Yet SNES is still #1 for me, I enjoy it's exclusives a lot more. And better version of the multiplatform games for the most part were better on SNES when compared to the Genesis.

Let's compare the best exclusives for each. It's easier when it's all out in front of you, and I'm geek so I like lists:

SNES:

Genesis:

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="TerragonSix"]

Back in the day, if you were old enough and remembered, this was an all-out war between these two consoles. And, it did get a little nasty. I can still remember SEGA's commercial about how the genesis was the 'cool' console. It was a heated rivalry that seemed to mirror onto the people who played them. This is not an argument thread on what is better and why, but rather, a comparison of how you felt about the subject then, and how you feel now.

For example:

THEN: Super Nintendo

Why? Christmas gift, aside from Sonic, Genesis never really did it for me. Controller felt awkward with the three button in a row configuration.

NOW: Super Nintendo

Why? I can name a whole lot more C-L-A-S-S-I-C (wtf is up with a forbidden html error? lol) titles on the SNES than I can with the Genesis.

bnnreviews

I'm different here. SNES and Genesis were probably my two favorite consoles of all-time. Well, Genesis and NES are awfully close in my book I really can't decide 2nd place between the two. Nonetheless, they are both awesome. Yet SNES is still #1 for me, I enjoy it's exclusives a lot more. And better version of the multiplatform games for the most part were better on SNES when compared to the Genesis.

Let's compare the best exclusives for each. It's easier when it's all out in front of you, and I'm geek so I like lists:

SNES:

ActraiserActraiser 2Aero FightersBreath of FireBreath of Fire IIChrono TriggerCastlevania: Dracula XContra III: The Alien WarsDarius TwinDonkey Kong CountryDonkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong QuestDonkey Kong Country 3: Dixie's TroubleDoomF-ZeroFinal Fantasy IIFinal Fantasy IIIFinal FightFinal Fight 2Final Fight 3Gradius IIIThe Illusion of GaiaKiller InstinctKirby's Super StarLegend of Zelda: A Link to the PastMarvel Super-Heroes: War of the GemsMega Man 7Mega Man XMega Man X2Mega Man X3Ninja Gaiden TrilogyR-Type III: The Third LightingSim CityStar FoxStreet Fighter Alpha 2Super Castlevania IVSuper Mario All-StarsSuper Mario KartSuper Mario RPGSuper Mario WorldSuper MetroidSuper R-TypeTeenage Mutant Ninja Turtles IV: Turtles in TimeTop GearTetris & Dr. MarioWolfenstein 3-DX-Men: Mutant Apocalypse

Genesis:

After Burner IIAltered BeastBeyond OasisCastlevania: BloodlinesCastle of Illusion Starring Mickey MouseColumnsComix ZoneContra: Hard CorpsEcco The DolphinEternal ChampionsGolden AxeGolden Axe IIGunstar HeroesLandstalkerMicheal Jackson's MoonwalkerM.U.S.H.A.Phantasy Star IIPhantasy Star III: Generations of DoomPhantasy Star IVThe PunisherRevenge of ShinobiRistarRoad RashRoad Rash IIRoad Rash IIIRocket Knight AdventuresShining ForceShinobi III: Return of hte Ninja MasterSonic the HedgehogSonic the Hedgehog 2Sonic the Hedgehog 3Sonic & KnucklesSpace Harrier IISpider-Man (1991)Splatterhouse 2Splatterhouse 3Streets of RageStreets of Rage 2Streets of Rage 3StriderTeenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Hyperstone HeistVectormanVectorman 2X-MenX-Men 2: The Clone WarsWonder Boy in Monster WorldWorld of Illusion Starring Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck

Actually in terms of arguing, some would debate wtih you that the PSX had a better library of RPGs than the PSX, but again thats a matter of debate and subjectivity as well. Yes the SNES had a great group of RPGs, but I would safely say that the PSX can rival it in terms of the best RPGs....

For me, it doesn't matter which is the best, what matters is that they were part of the 16-bit era which is of course the Platinum Era of Gaming:P

then only owned a snes nes gb

now! i tried most of the genesis games , and i am going with my trusty super nintendo ,

because it has top gear zombies ate my neighbors-the best version all the mario games, mariokart fzero starfox just alot more games such as rock n roll racing etc

Once again I gotta stick with the SNES. There's a reason why Sega is not making consoles anymore.

Jurassic85