VGCollect Forum

General and Gaming => Classic Video Games => Topic started by: courtlyhades296 on January 21, 2016, 09:38:59 pm

Title: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: courtlyhades296 on January 21, 2016, 09:38:59 pm
In your opinion, which is better? My choice is SNES. Final Fantasy VI, Super Metroid, and many other timeless games are what make it my favorite system.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: fighterpilot562 on January 21, 2016, 09:53:13 pm
SNES, mostly cause it was the system that really got me into gaming as a child.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: badATchaos on January 21, 2016, 10:48:09 pm
To me it's a kin to comparing Dreamcast to PS2. Same generation but one is a bit newer and has a bit more juice. Yes, the Mega Drive was faster in some ways but the SNES was generally more advance, thanks to it being a bit newer.

When it comes to games the same kind of thing applies. Many of the hits on the MD/Genesis came out in the 80s and are generally simplistic. This doesn't mean the system was bad or anything, it's just that devs were still thinking on a simpler 8bit mind set. To me games like Sonic and Altered Beast were just pretty NES games. Over the next few years developers did started making more complex games and by the time SNES came out I think they knew what they were doing.

All i'm trying to say is that the difference in hardware makes them hard tricky to compare. I know the Dreamcast-PS2 analogy is kinda weak because in that case there was a bigger tech gap but I think you get my meaning.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: hexen on January 21, 2016, 10:52:35 pm
Games are a subjective matter, but the SNES is objectively the better system in nearly every way from a technical standpoint. Actually, forget being sensitive to other opinions, the SNES' library of games is also objectively better~ ;) The SNES had a library of game that many of have not been surpassed to this day, so it's ill-fated rival in it's day had no chance. In my opinion, the SNES & PS2 are in a console tier no other console is ever likely to match.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: badATchaos on January 21, 2016, 11:02:16 pm
Well said. They also had some of the longest lifespans too.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: aliensstudios on January 21, 2016, 11:05:31 pm
SNES hands down because it has a lot of great games. I still think the Genesis is great but the SNES has a better library.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 22, 2016, 12:34:22 am
Games are a subjective matter, but the SNES is objectively the better system in nearly every way from a technical standpoint. Actually, forget being sensitive to other opinions, the SNES' library of games is also objectively better~ ;) The SNES had a library of game that many of have not been surpassed to this day, so it's ill-fated rival in it's day had no chance. In my opinion, the SNES & PS2 are in a console tier no other console is ever likely to match.

^this.

As someone with nearly a hundred titles on each console I have to say the SNES console is the winner hands down.

That said, Sonic the Hedgehog and Streets of Rage have yet to be equaled in their awesomeness. :)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: asmodean on January 22, 2016, 02:26:38 am
For me, the winner is the Mega Drive/Genesis. Mostly because the Mega Drive was the console I got for christmas and grew up with, but also because it felt more grown up at the time with less censorshop etc.

Altough I'll give you that the SNES had fancier graphics :)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: retrogemcollector on January 22, 2016, 05:00:45 am
Hardware wise, Genesis of course, software wise there is no question: SNES.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: courtlyhades296 on January 22, 2016, 10:37:47 am
For me, the winner is the Mega Drive/Genesis. Mostly because the Mega Drive was the console I got for christmas and grew up with, but also because it felt more grown up at the time with less censorshop etc.

Altough I'll give you that the SNES had fancier graphics :)

Terranigma for the SNES is better than all 530 games on the PAL Mega Drive. It also has a thought-provoking plot and an uncensored script. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3vk5N8TyYU The game's soundtrack shows just how much of an advance the SNES made over the Genesis/Mega Drive.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 22, 2016, 12:04:34 pm
Both are two of the greatest systems to EVER be produced.

But if I had to choose, the SNES. Just way too many all-time classics, and I like the sound much better. Way too many Genesis games have the farty-sounding music.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 22, 2016, 01:25:16 pm
I'll be the dissenting voice here and say that I don't think the SNES is better. Even though, I will admit that most of my childhood memories are with the SNES. That in itself, doesn't make it a better console. It wasn't until years later that I realized Genesis has a lot more to offer than just Sonic.

Technically inferior/superior or not, both consoles have some good looking games, and I don't see much of a difference even with SNES's better specs. I'll also probably the only one to point out how much I dislike the music on SNES. Worst console music ever. That infernal trumpeting sound? I would take the buzz and click of Sega Genesis music any day.

So while I am a proponent of the Genesis, I'll still have to say I enjoy the SNES more, mostly due to nostalgia and my attachment to the games themselves.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: tafk on January 22, 2016, 01:32:59 pm
I'll always be a sega fanboy...
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: soera on January 22, 2016, 01:53:15 pm
I am a Sega fanboy myself. But the SNES is probably the greatest system that Nintendo ever released. So many of the top games on most people's list stem from that one system that is about 25 years old. For a game, thats ancient and yet most of them are still untouched. Link to the past, Super Metroid, Super Mario RPG, Chrono Trigger, Final fantasy IV and VI just to name some off the top of my head.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 22, 2016, 02:26:22 pm
SNES by a mile.  I was a working man when the Genesis and SNES were in their heyday and as such, I had to own both. 

On the hardware side, the SNES smashed the Genesis.  Side-by-side (yes, my friends and I actually did this stuff waaaaay back then), games like Lion King and Mortal Kombat were significantly better on the SNES.  They were less grainy, had a larger color palette and the sound effects of the SNES were far superior.  Finally, the SNES gamepad was unmatched.  If you were an early adopter of the Genesis/Mega-Drive, you had a 3-button controller.  You had to buy a 6-button controller afterward.

On the software side, the SNES again smashed the Genesis.  Sega made some fun games and they had a lot of arcade ports of stuff like Altered Beast and Golden Axe.  But up against the SNES, Super Mario World alone set the bar for greatness.  Zelda, Illusion of Gaia, Final Fantasy, ActRaiser, Super Castlevania IV, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Super Metroid, Donkey Kong Country.....possibly the best lineup of games in any single generation.  Genesis RPG's were few & far between and stuff like Toejam & Earl, Comix Zone, Sonic, Golden Axe, etc. - while fun - paled in comparison to the most polished games of the generation. 

Putting exclusive against exclusive showed there was no contest to begin with.  Super Castlevania IV walked all over Castlevania Bloodlines.  Super Mario World destroyed all Sonic games combined.  Super Ghouls & Ghosts easily trounced Ghouls & Ghosts on the Genesis. 

Yep.  No contest.  The SNES is the reigning champion.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 22, 2016, 02:32:01 pm
Genesis is the winner in my opinion, but just for personal preference. Sega probably could have stayed neck and neck with Nintendo in America if they would have focused more on games and pushing the Genesis instead of Sega CD and 32x. (Nintendo should have learned Sega's lesson - don't be first to market (Wii U), don't make upgrade or add ons for your system (New 3ds, maybe NX), and don't burn your fanbase (Wii U and New 3ds are about to have this happen I bet).

I actually liked the SNES more when I was younger, but I have found more of an appreciation for the Genesis as an adult.

Sega is the Mike Huckabee of video game companies. They continually lost almost every election (cycle) and would keep plugging away for another run at it. They fought hard to bring their unique perspective to the industry, but it wasn't ever going to win it all. Other than Mike Huckabee is a Christian and seems to have a pretty clean record, and Sega is probably crawling with Yakuza money. 

Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 22, 2016, 09:34:20 pm
Genesis is the winner in my opinion, but just for personal preference. Sega probably could have stayed neck and neck with Nintendo in America if they would have focused more on games and pushing the Genesis instead of Sega CD and 32x. (Nintendo should have learned Sega's lesson - don't be first to market (Wii U), don't make upgrade or add ons for your system (New 3ds, maybe NX), and don't burn your fanbase (Wii U and New 3ds are about to have this happen I bet).

I actually liked the SNES more when I was younger, but I have found more of an appreciation for the Genesis as an adult.

Sega is the Mike Huckabee of video game companies. They continually lost almost every election (cycle) and would keep plugging away for another run at it. They fought hard to bring their unique perspective to the industry, but it wasn't ever going to win it all. Other than Mike Huckabee is a Christian and seems to have a pretty clean record, and Sega is probably crawling with Yakuza money.

Well, I feel a little odd siding with the Genesis after the Huckabee comparison...  ;)

You seem to be right about the yakuza stuff too. There was a recent interview where a ex-yakuza stated the only clean companies in games were Namco and Nintendo. However, reading Game Over, I get the impression they ran stuff basically like the yakuza anyway and didn't need them. Yamauchi was one iron-fisted, take everyone one down, type of guy.

Well, I definitely side with the Genesis. However, they are both great systems.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 22, 2016, 11:21:26 pm
Well, I feel a little odd siding with the Genesis after the Huckabee comparison...  ;)

You seem to be right about the yakuza stuff too. There was a recent interview where a ex-yakuza stated the only clean companies in games were Namco and Nintendo. However, reading Game Over, I get the impression they ran stuff basically like the yakuza anyway and didn't need them. Yamauchi was one iron-fisted, take everyone one down, type of guy.

Well, I definitely side with the Genesis. However, they are both great systems.

I didn't bring up the Huckabee comparison to make it political (not sure if most people care for him here or would rather see him run out of the country), but it made me think of him how he runs for president every opportunity and his chances are 0% of ever making office.

I could see Nintendo being Yakuza free especially since they don't do much arcade, pachinko, etc... If Sega was not wrapped up in the Yakuza before they definitely are now being with Sammy.

Speaking of Yamauchi - here is a fitting article about the Genesis/SNES battle. http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/1994-02-20/nintendos-yamauchi-no-more-playing-around

Maybe even the Yakuza who probably have the whole country under their thumb couldn't even intimidate Yamauchi.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 24, 2016, 02:30:24 pm
To me it's a kin to comparing Dreamcast to PS2. Same generation but one is a bit newer and has a bit more juice. Yes, the Mega Drive was faster in some ways but the SNES was generally more advance, thanks to it being a bit newer.

When it comes to games the same kind of thing applies. Many of the hits on the MD/Genesis came out in the 80s and are generally simplistic. This doesn't mean the system was bad or anything, it's just that devs were still thinking on a simpler 8bit mind set. To me games like Sonic and Altered Beast were just pretty NES games. Over the next few years developers did started making more complex games and by the time SNES came out I think they knew what they were doing.

All i'm trying to say is that the difference in hardware makes them hard tricky to compare. I know the Dreamcast-PS2 analogy is kinda weak because in that case there was a bigger tech gap but I think you get my meaning.

Comparing dreamcast to ps2 hell no.

The ps2 is far superior to the dreamcast while snes and megadrive/ genesis are really close.

I'm talking about game library and that the dreamcast was dead pretty early.

Also about people thinking that sega fanboys like sonic games, best of the system etc? Think again sonic games are one of the least things I think about when turning on my megadrive.

I barely play sonic games, when I play on my megadrive not to great, compared to other stuff on the megadrive wich the reason is why I appreciate this system.

I think sega did better than nintendo in this era. Nintendo definitly has some great games

I'm a mario fanboy and you cannot compare mario to sonic but some other games on the sega console are a hell lot of fun to play.

Also I prefer castlevania bloodlines/new generation to super castlevania IV both great games

Music is superior in sega, for other sounds snes usually wins not always.

Streets of rage 2 has awesome music and the best in the sor series streets of rage 1 pales in comparison.

People always complain about the 3 button pad but you could just use an arcade controller problem solved afterwards. Who cares about the regular controller if you get a better one. I;ve got 2 arcade controllers myself and 2 wireless 6 button controllers so no problems for me.

Also for great rpg's on the snes with chrono trigger, final fantasy III etc, sega has phantasy star IV and the shining force series.

Nintendo did better with adds and sega is pretty less known with it's better games but if your talking about grapics sound and gameplay I'll give sega the win.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 24, 2016, 03:58:01 pm
Nintendo did better with adds and sega is pretty less known with it's better games but if your talking about grapics sound and gameplay I'll give sega the win.

Actually I only (vaguely) remember a couple Nintendo ads:

One for Star Fox "danger danger" "you are FOX mccloud, in Star Fox".

The other is for the Super Scope. Accurate down to "A single. Television. pixel."

I remember a TON of Sega commercials though.

The Sonic and Knucles proposal to Santa with "lock on technology".

The Sega Genesis "blast processing" commercial

The "Say what!? You still don't have a Sega CD!? What are you waiting for Nintendo to make one?" Commercial

The "you can't do this on Nintendo. Genesis does!" Commercials.

Those are off the top of my head and our was a Nintendo household at the time.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 24, 2016, 04:19:47 pm
Nintendo did better with adds and sega is pretty less known with it's better games but if your talking about grapics sound and gameplay I'll give sega the win.

Actually I only (vaguely) remember a couple Nintendo ads:

One for Star Fox "danger danger" "you are FOX mccloud, in Star Fox".

The other is for the Super Scope. Accurate down to "A single. Television. pixel."

I remember a TON of Sega commercials though.

The Sonic and Knucles proposal to Santa with "lock on technology".

The Sega Genesis "blast processing" commercial

The "Say what!? You still don't have a Sega CD!? What are you waiting for Nintendo to make one?" Commercial

The "you can't do this on Nintendo. Genesis does!" Commercials.

Those are off the top of my head and our was a Nintendo household at the time.

That's true however this really applies to their sonic games.

I mean you must agree that some really good genesis games are really unknown compared to the gems on nintendo.

People nowadays mainly talk about the sonic games, when talking about the genesis console since other than those games the other games did not get that much attention, I actually meant by adds for selling them games nintendo did a better job than sega not the tv commercials part.

The campaign of sega was mainly focused on the console and sonic games or games like altered beast streets of rage golden axe (launch title)  some really good games on the sega console are really unknown thanks to bad advertisement on sega's part their is no denying on that since it is fact.





Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 24, 2016, 08:28:11 pm
I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: maximo310 on January 24, 2016, 10:23:43 pm
In techincal terms,
If you compare the system designs of both systems, the Genesis is far better designed spec-wise for a 1988 machine, vs. SNES for a 1991 machine. A large part of that was because of the insisting that the SNES  have a PCM-based sound chip ( SPC-700) instead of a hybrid solution like a YM2151+OKI6295/ YM2610. As a result, the SNES had to cut back in the CPU power, the amount of RAM for different areas, and backwards comptability to keep the price down.

Both systems had terrible default sound drivers, meaning that third- parties had to create their own sound drivers if they wanted to use different voicings/samples from the defaults. Good examples of this are the FFIV-FFV-FFVI OST's for the SNES, and Thunder Force II-III-IV for the Genesis.

When it comes to games, I think the SNES overall has top tier games in certain genres such as RPG's, strategy,action-adventure, and platformers, while the Genesis had better sports games, arcade games, and shmups. One of Sega's tactics at the time was to make more games, which were usually B-tier quality ( Sonic Spinball, Kid Chamelon) to compete against Nintendo's A-tier games that came out less often. More games translated into more overall sales, especially once Sonic started to help sell Genesis systems.

Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 24, 2016, 11:19:36 pm
I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.

Nothing. Most titles have been mentioned already - Thunder Force, Sports titles, etc... Only other huge sellers that were Genesis exclusives were some of the X-Men games. I remember wanting those as a kid since all I had was a SNES. Some might say Mega Man Wily Wars also, but in North America it was available through Sega Channel. Dis anyone here ever use that service?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 25, 2016, 03:12:40 am
In techincal terms,
If you compare the system designs of both systems, the Genesis is far better designed spec-wise for a 1988 machine, vs. SNES for a 1991 machine. A large part of that was because of the insisting that the SNES  have a PCM-based sound chip ( SPC-700) instead of a hybrid solution like a YM2151+OKI6295/ YM2610. As a result, the SNES had to cut back in the CPU power, the amount of RAM for different areas, and backwards comptability to keep the price down.

Both systems had terrible default sound drivers, meaning that third- parties had to create their own sound drivers if they wanted to use different voicings/samples from the defaults. Good examples of this are the FFIV-FFV-FFVI OST's for the SNES, and Thunder Force II-III-IV for the Genesis.

When it comes to games, I think the SNES overall has top tier games in certain genres such as RPG's, strategy,action-adventure, and platformers, while the Genesis had better sports games, arcade games, and shmups. One of Sega's tactics at the time was to make more games, which were usually B-tier quality ( Sonic Spinball, Kid Chamelon) to compete against Nintendo's A-tier games that came out less often. More games translated into more overall sales, especially once Sonic started to help sell Genesis systems.

Phantasy star IV is up there for an rpg of high quality.

I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.

This is exactly what I mean most people who are a nintendo guy with a sega only talk about sonic and streets of rage and or golden axe or altered beast.  Definitly not the greatest games so stereothypical and people saying so many sport games. People are just missing the picture when there is no famous mastcot mentioned in the games.

I mean the game the mentioned above are easy to come by and the better known titles on the sega are pretty hard to come by but not that expensive by all means when comparing to nintendo.

Just some examples of what you are missing

The sega is a system of shootemups musha truxton thunderforce phelios raiden trad etc.

Arcade games: strider, second samurai, mega turrican better than the 2 super turrican games on the snes by far. super turrican 2 was particulary bad. splatter house series outrun.

Platformers/ run and gun castlevania bloodlines, rocket knight adventures, sparkster shinobi series contra hard cops, gunstar heroes.

Rpg's phantasy star series IV is the best III is the worst, shining force series, crusader of centy

There are way more games, I just hate it when people don't see this awesome games in the library

I have seen more people with 80 games for a console but quantity does not mean quality since allot of people have allot of filler titles wich are not worth playing. There are allot of crappy games on the sega but same goes for snes.




Also I do see you have some nice quality games in the collection for the sega.

Have you ever tried playing shinobi III castlevania bloodlines turtles hyperstone heist, contra, gunstar heroes, ristar or rocketknight?

All quality games but few in that list are one of the best of the system I'm suprised you only find the sonic and streets of rage games to stand out when you have some awesome games in the collection some wich are the best for the system. I'm curious if you have ever played one of the above titles, if not give them at least a try especially shinobi III.

If you don't like all games mentioned above than the sega ain't for you aside from the sonic titles with respect since everyone has their own taste and these are the kinda games sega has to offer.

Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 09:17:45 am
Phantasy star IV is up there for an rpg of high quality.

This is exactly what I mean most people who are a nintendo guy with a sega only talk about sonic and streets of rage and or golden axe or altered beast.  Definitly not the greatest games so stereothypical and people saying so many sport games. People are just missing the picture when there is no famous mastcot mentioned in the games.

I mean the game the mentioned above are easy to come by and the better known titles on the sega are pretty hard to come by but not that expensive by all means when comparing to nintendo.

Just some examples of what you are missing

The sega is a system of shootemups musha truxton thunderforce phelios raiden trad etc.

Arcade games: strider, second samurai, mega turrican better than the 2 super turrican games on the snes by far. super turrican 2 was particulary bad. splatter house series outrun.

Platformers/ run and gun castlevania bloodlines, rocket knight adventures, sparkster shinobi series contra hard cops, gunstar heroes.

Rpg's phantasy star series IV is the best III is the worst, shining force series, crusader of centy

There are way more games, I just hate it when people don't see this awesome games in the library

I have seen more people with 80 games for a console but quantity does not mean quality since allot of people have allot of filler titles wich are not worth playing. There are allot of crappy games on the sega but same goes for snes.

Also I do see you have some nice quality games in the collection for the sega.

Have you ever tried playing shinobi III castlevania bloodlines turtles hyperstone heist, contra, gunstar heroes, ristar or rocketknight?

All quality games but few in that list are one of the best of the system I'm suprised you only find the sonic and streets of rage games to stand out when you have some awesome games in the collection some wich are the best for the system. I'm curious if you have ever played one of the above titles, if not give them at least a try especially shinobi III.

If you don't like all games mentioned above than the sega ain't for you aside from the sonic titles with respect since everyone has their own taste and these are the kinda games sega has to offer.

I'm not poo-pooing the Genesis/MegaDrive library, but I have to be honest when I say that owning both simultaneously the SNES trounced the Genesis at every turn.  Every game you mention like Turtles, Castlevania, Shinobi, Phantasy Star, Gunstar, RocketKnight....they all had a similar and almost universally better version or equivalent on the SNES. 

I loved my Genesis back in the day but I'm just being honest when I say that the SNES killed it.  I also found many of the "beloved" Sega games to quite frankly-suck.  Comix Zone.  Altered Beast.  Alex Kidd.  Ecco.  Flicky.  Kid Chameleon.  Vectorman.  These games sucked.  The multiplatform games were always inferior and the versions of Castlevania, Turtles and others were just "Hey look, we got that too!" versions that felt half-hearted.

And while fun for awhile, Shinobi was always a lesser Ninja Gaiden. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: bikingjahuty on January 25, 2016, 09:48:28 am
I will always prefer the Genesis to the SNES, mostly because I grew up with it and my friends at the time had the Genesis as well. I still prefer Sonic 1, 2, 3 and Knuckles to Mario World 1 and 2, and may other games on he Genesis. Yes, the SNES was technically superior, but the Genesis is s till an amazing console and one that I am quite fond of and always will be.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 10:23:50 am
Landstalker & Moonwalker... 'Nuff Said

Genesis wins. Next system match up.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 11:03:28 am
Landstalker & Moonwalker... 'Nuff Said

Genesis wins. Next system match up.

Pfft.  Dreams died back in '01 when Sega as a hardware maker went kaput.  Nintendo keeps chugging along 15 years later.  And Landstalker sucked and had some of the most horrendous artwork and graphics.  And Moonwalker?  Hahahahahahahahaha.

I think someone forgot the sarcasm tag.   :P  Chrono Trigger laughs in the Genesis' face.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: maximo310 on January 25, 2016, 11:09:38 am

Phantasy star IV is up there for an rpg of high quality.
It is, but the amount of high quality rpgs on the Genesis pales in comparison to the amount available on the SNES.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 25, 2016, 11:31:40 am
Phantasy star IV is up there for an rpg of high quality.

This is exactly what I mean most people who are a nintendo guy with a sega only talk about sonic and streets of rage and or golden axe or altered beast.  Definitly not the greatest games so stereothypical and people saying so many sport games. People are just missing the picture when there is no famous mastcot mentioned in the games.

I mean the game the mentioned above are easy to come by and the better known titles on the sega are pretty hard to come by but not that expensive by all means when comparing to nintendo.

Just some examples of what you are missing

The sega is a system of shootemups musha truxton thunderforce phelios raiden trad etc.

Arcade games: strider, second samurai, mega turrican better than the 2 super turrican games on the snes by far. super turrican 2 was particulary bad. splatter house series outrun.

Platformers/ run and gun castlevania bloodlines, rocket knight adventures, sparkster shinobi series contra hard cops, gunstar heroes.

Rpg's phantasy star series IV is the best III is the worst, shining force series, crusader of centy

There are way more games, I just hate it when people don't see this awesome games in the library

I have seen more people with 80 games for a console but quantity does not mean quality since allot of people have allot of filler titles wich are not worth playing. There are allot of crappy games on the sega but same goes for snes.

Also I do see you have some nice quality games in the collection for the sega.

Have you ever tried playing shinobi III castlevania bloodlines turtles hyperstone heist, contra, gunstar heroes, ristar or rocketknight?

All quality games but few in that list are one of the best of the system I'm suprised you only find the sonic and streets of rage games to stand out when you have some awesome games in the collection some wich are the best for the system. I'm curious if you have ever played one of the above titles, if not give them at least a try especially shinobi III.

If you don't like all games mentioned above than the sega ain't for you aside from the sonic titles with respect since everyone has their own taste and these are the kinda games sega has to offer.

I'm not poo-pooing the Genesis/MegaDrive library, but I have to be honest when I say that owning both simultaneously the SNES trounced the Genesis at every turn.  Every game you mention like Turtles, Castlevania, Shinobi, Phantasy Star, Gunstar, RocketKnight....they all had a similar and almost universally better version or equivalent on the SNES. 

I loved my Genesis back in the day but I'm just being honest when I say that the SNES killed it.  I also found many of the "beloved" Sega games to quite frankly-suck.  Comix Zone.  Altered Beast.  Alex Kidd.  Ecco.  Flicky.  Kid Chameleon.  Vectorman.  These games sucked.  The multiplatform games were always inferior and the versions of Castlevania, Turtles and others were just "Hey look, we got that too!" versions that felt half-hearted.

And while fun for awhile, Shinobi was always a lesser Ninja Gaiden.

Have you ever played shinobi III?

By far superior to the ninja gaiden series and way better than shinobi 1 if you compared that game to ninja gaiden.

Also I own both sega and snes system and I find castlevania on the sega to be better than super castlevania IV also batman & robin advenutres was the better game on the sega console

Also nintendo did not have splatterhouse.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 12:07:20 pm
Have you ever played shinobi III?

By far superior to the ninja gaiden series and way better than shinobi 1 if you compared that game to ninja gaiden.

Also I own both sega and snes system and I find castlevania on the sega to be better than super castlevania IV also batman & robin advenutres was the better game on the sega console

Also nintendo did not have splatterhouse.

Yep, played Shinobi III.  It's on my Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection as well.  Personal preference of course, but Ninja Gaiden shat all over it. 

As for Castlevania Bloodlines, I always hated the graphics and the stupid lance.  Super Castlevania is universally considered the superior title.  Batman & Robin I cannot comment on as I never cared for those games.

Splatterhouse?  I'm sure Nintendo wasn't hurting from that missing title when they had the massive Squaresoft and Enix catalog exclusively on their system.  Nothing can touch those games.  Each and every one a masterpiece. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 12:11:49 pm
Ouch - not a fan of Isometric view or crotch grabbing?

If we are going to make this a personal Sega/Nintendo war since your unclean lips spoke of 2001 then here we go.  ;D
Sega:
1. First to use Haptic Feedback in videogames.
2. Stylus game control first patent awarded to Sega
3. 3d stereoscopic gaming - Sega first
4. First Dedicated Game system with additional features - game gear with tv tuner
5. PS plus and Live Gold games. Rip off of Sega Channel (ok - GameLine was first... Love you, Atari)
6. Sega creates the First game console to have a full blown operating system installed
7. Sega Activator - revel in its magnificence

Landstalker & Moonwalker... 'Nuff Said

Genesis wins. Next system match up.

Pfft.  Dreams died back in '01 when Sega as a hardware maker went kaput.  Nintendo keeps chugging along 15 years later.  And Landstalker sucked and had some of the most horrendous artwork and graphics.  And Moonwalker?  Hahahahahahahahaha.

I think someone forgot the sarcasm tag.   :P  Chrono Trigger laughs in the Genesis' face.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 12:25:33 pm
Ouch - not a fan of Isometric view or crotch grabbing?

If we are going to make this a personal Sega/Nintendo war since your unclean lips spoke of 2001 then here we go.  ;D
Sega:
1. First to use Haptic Feedback in videogames.
2. Stylus game control first patent awarded to Sega
3. 3d stereoscopic gaming - Sega first
4. First Dedicated Game system with additional features - game gear with tv tuner
5. PS plus and Live Gold games. Rip off of Sega Channel (ok - GameLine was first... Love you, Atari)
6. Sega creates the First game console to have a full blown operating system installed
7. Sega Activator - revel in its magnificence

Landstalker & Moonwalker... 'Nuff Said

Genesis wins. Next system match up.

Pfft.  Dreams died back in '01 when Sega as a hardware maker went kaput.  Nintendo keeps chugging along 15 years later.  And Landstalker sucked and had some of the most horrendous artwork and graphics.  And Moonwalker?  Hahahahahahahahaha.

I think someone forgot the sarcasm tag.   :P  Chrono Trigger laughs in the Genesis' face.
I don't know what you consider to be a full blown OS, but the Bandai Pippin had a modified version of Mac OS on it.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 25, 2016, 12:28:05 pm
Have you ever played shinobi III?

By far superior to the ninja gaiden series and way better than shinobi 1 if you compared that game to ninja gaiden.

Also I own both sega and snes system and I find castlevania on the sega to be better than super castlevania IV also batman & robin advenutres was the better game on the sega console

Also nintendo did not have splatterhouse.

Yep, played Shinobi III.  It's on my Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection as well.  Personal preference of course, but Ninja Gaiden shat all over it. 

As for Castlevania Bloodlines, I always hated the graphics and the stupid lance.  Super Castlevania is universally considered the superior title.  Batman & Robin I cannot comment on as I never cared for those games.

Splatterhouse?  I'm sure Nintendo wasn't hurting from that missing title when they had the massive Squaresoft and Enix catalog exclusively on their system.  Nothing can touch those games.  Each and every one a masterpiece.

Phantasy star IV is by far better than most games of square soft and enix snes catalog and even considered to be better than titles such as chrono trigger and FF III.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 12:28:36 pm
Ouch - not a fan of Isometric view or crotch grabbing?

If we are going to make this a personal Sega/Nintendo war since your unclean lips spoke of 2001 then here we go.  ;D
Sega:
1. First to use Haptic Feedback in videogames.
2. Stylus game control first patent awarded to Sega
3. 3d stereoscopic gaming - Sega first
4. First Dedicated Game system with additional features - game gear with tv tuner
5. PS plus and Live Gold games. Rip off of Sega Channel (ok - GameLine was first... Love you, Atari)
6. Sega creates the First game console to have a full blown operating system installed
7. Sega Activator - revel in its magnificence

LOL....Here's some for Nintendo.

1.  Single-handedly revitalized the home video game market.  Meanwhile, Sega was busy playing with Tonka.   :P
2.  Only company to continue successfully releasing handhelds.  Game Gear and Nomad fizzled away.  Fast.
3.  Mario, Zelda and Metroid.  That right there blows away all the other four you listed for Sega.  So there.   :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 12:31:53 pm
I was referring to a Video Game Console. I always considered the Pippin as a cheap computer that focused heavily on games. Wasn't that thing like $700 when it came out. Makes me remember how expensive computers used to be.

Apple is the Playstation of computers and mobile devices. Steal everyone's ideas and make them "cool".
Oh yeah - I just took it there... (drops mic and walks off stage)


Ouch - not a fan of Isometric view or crotch grabbing?

If we are going to make this a personal Sega/Nintendo war since your unclean lips spoke of 2001 then here we go.  ;D
Sega:
1. First to use Haptic Feedback in videogames.
2. Stylus game control first patent awarded to Sega
3. 3d stereoscopic gaming - Sega first
4. First Dedicated Game system with additional features - game gear with tv tuner
5. PS plus and Live Gold games. Rip off of Sega Channel (ok - GameLine was first... Love you, Atari)
6. Sega creates the First game console to have a full blown operating system installed
7. Sega Activator - revel in its magnificence

Landstalker & Moonwalker... 'Nuff Said

Genesis wins. Next system match up.

Pfft.  Dreams died back in '01 when Sega as a hardware maker went kaput.  Nintendo keeps chugging along 15 years later.  And Landstalker sucked and had some of the most horrendous artwork and graphics.  And Moonwalker?  Hahahahahahahahaha.

I think someone forgot the sarcasm tag.   :P  Chrono Trigger laughs in the Genesis' face.
I don't know what you consider to be a full blown OS, but the Bandai Pippin had a modified version of Mac OS on it.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 12:32:05 pm
Phantasy star IV is by far better than most games of square soft and enix snes catalog and even considered to be better than titles such as chrono trigger and FF III.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.....excuse me.   ......hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

From Wiki:
"Phantasy Star IV: End of the Millennium received generally mixed reviews, with critics typically approving of the gameplay elements but disapproving of the story and graphics. GamePro praised the ability to inspect background objects, the convenience of the macros and talk option, and the translation. However, they commented that the inability to purchase multiple items at once is irritating, and were especially critical of the story, describing it as routine, frequently incoherent, and derogatory towards women.[16] The four reviewers of Electronic Gaming Monthly gave it an average score of 7.75 out of 10, commenting that the graphics are mediocre, the music is irritating, and the story is too slow paced, but that the magic/technique system, equipment, and general gameplay are all highly involving and enjoyable.[11] Sega Saturn Magazine (previously Sega Magazine) gave the game a 90%, saying that the graphics were outdated even compared to other Mega Drive/Genesis games and that the game is incomprehensible to newcomers to the series, but that "the game succeeds by creating cinematic moments, introducing new characters and powers, and taking many weird and wonderful plot turns."
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 12:33:39 pm
Apple is the Playstation of computers and mobile devices. Steal everyone's ideas and make them "cool".
Oh yeah - I just took it there... (drops mic and walks off stage)

I believe you are thinking about Micro$$$oft. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 12:35:15 pm
@gf78 you hate toy trucks too...? My heart cries for you.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 25, 2016, 12:38:00 pm
Phantasy star IV is by far better than most games of square soft and enix snes catalog and even considered to be better than titles such as chrono trigger and FF III.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.....excuse me.   ......hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

From Wiki:
"Phantasy Star IV: End of the Millennium received generally mixed reviews, with critics typically approving of the gameplay elements but disapproving of the story and graphics. GamePro praised the ability to inspect background objects, the convenience of the macros and talk option, and the translation. However, they commented that the inability to purchase multiple items at once is irritating, and were especially critical of the story, describing it as routine, frequently incoherent, and derogatory towards women.[16] The four reviewers of Electronic Gaming Monthly gave it an average score of 7.75 out of 10, commenting that the graphics are mediocre, the music is irritating, and the story is too slow paced, but that the magic/technique system, equipment, and general gameplay are all highly involving and enjoyable.[11] Sega Saturn Magazine (previously Sega Magazine) gave the game a 90%, saying that the graphics were outdated even compared to other Mega Drive/Genesis games and that the game is incomprehensible to newcomers to the series, but that "the game succeeds by creating cinematic moments, introducing new characters and powers, and taking many weird and wonderful plot turns."

I cannot take critics seriously these days or in the past I'm sorry your post proves nothing.

A contender to beat titles such as chronotrigger and by many considered as the best.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 12:39:33 pm
Also, doing something first and doing something right are completely different... if anything, some of those are negative points.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 12:41:11 pm
Apple is the Playstation of computers and mobile devices. Steal everyone's ideas and make them "cool".
Oh yeah - I just took it there... (drops mic and walks off stage)

I believe you are thinking about Micro$$$oft.

I cant think of one thing Sony brought to the video game industry. Not one new invention or innovation. They just took existing things and sold them better than the competitors. Good for them. I am curious if anyone can name anything they contributed to further gaming.

Back on topic: SNES wins in being the ugliest console made for North America. Mine even turned yellow over the years. I'm not sure if it is because of the plastic they used or if it was because I used it as a urinal when I was playing long sessions on my Genesis.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 12:44:49 pm
Apple is the Playstation of computers and mobile devices. Steal everyone's ideas and make them "cool".
Oh yeah - I just took it there... (drops mic and walks off stage)

I believe you are thinking about Micro$$$oft.

I cant think of one thing Sony brought to the video game industry. Not one new invention or innovation. They just took existing things and sold them better than the competitors. Good for them. I am curious if anyone can name anything they contributed to further gaming.

Back on topic: SNES wins in being the ugliest console made for North America.
Again, Sony made things orders of magnitude greater than Sega did.

Also, Dual joysticks, you are welcome WORLD.

Also, I don't know, the sega genesis with all of its expansions is pretty effin ugly.  Horrible eyesore.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 12:57:17 pm
@ctracy87

Too true - the dual analogue controller is now the norm.

UGLY????? How dare you?

Bask in the glory of it all! (http://s9.postimg.org/sskuy4nz3/sega_tower_of_power.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 25, 2016, 01:02:22 pm
^ The Sega tower looks like a vacuum cleaner from the 80s.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 25, 2016, 01:15:23 pm
I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.

I think there are plenty, and you even own some of them sir. Let's see, Rocket Knight Adventures, Revenge of Shinobi and Shadow Dancer, Toejam & Earl, Gunstar Heroes, Vectorman, Castle and World of Illusion, Alisia Dragoon, Phantasy Star II/III/IV, Castlevania Bloodlines, Dynamite Headdy, Ristar, Golden Axe... these are all games that immediately come to mind when I think of the Genesis, and none of those titles are really obscure, or anything. So if none of it stands out to you....

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b5/74/f2/b574f2eb725709460d7ec79a084ab189.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 01:20:37 pm
@ctracy87

Too true - the dual analogue controller is now the norm.

UGLY????? How dare you?

Bask in the glory of it all! (http://s9.postimg.org/sskuy4nz3/sega_tower_of_power.jpg)
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 25, 2016, 02:02:22 pm
I cant think of one thing Sony brought to the video game industry. Not one new invention or innovation. They just took existing things and sold them better than the competitors. Good for them. I am curious if anyone can name anything they contributed to further gaming.

Back on topic: SNES wins in being the ugliest console made for North America. Mine even turned yellow over the years. I'm not sure if it is because of the plastic they used or if it was because I used it as a urinal when I was playing long sessions on my Genesis.

1.  First console to use dual-analog controls.
2.  First console with an end-user programmable system & tools (Net Yaroze)
3.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of DVD.
4.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of Blu-Ray discs. 
5.  First home console to utilize VR (coming this year!)
6.  Ushered in the era of 3D polygon graphics (Saturn sucked and was built around 2D sprites)
7.  Moved gaming from being considered "a kid's toy" to being an acceptable pastime for adults.
8.  First console to sell over 100 million units.
9.  PS2 is best selling console of all time with over 150 million units sold.
10.  Exclusive home to some of the most important games in history (Final Fantasy VII, Castlevania Symphony of the Night, Metal Gear Solid)
11.  Knocked Nintendo down a peg or two, relegating them to second place.
12.  Damaged Sega so badly, they went software-only.

Honestly, you can say that all game makers copied and iterated on what other did before them.  It's the nature of the beast.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 02:15:03 pm
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.

The cargo pants are ugly. I assume that is what you were referring to in the picture.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 02:29:04 pm
Really number one is the only innovation.

Net Yaroze was just a development kit that was released to the public. DVD games had already been released before Playstation2 and it is just an incremental jump from CD for more storage on a media disc. Blu-Ray is just more storage capacity - not really an innovation either. VR is a technology that has been used before Sony looked in to it for their system. The rest of the is just accomplishments not really innovation for the industry.

Innovations in my mind are things that changed how we played videogames:

1. Nintendo = D-Pad
2. Microsoft = achievements
3. Sega = Haptic Feedback
4. GameLine = online gaming although in a primitive format
5. Sony = dual analogue controller
6. Nyko Hip Clip for the Game Boy = helped us to know which gamers to avoid if they wore one of these.

1.  First console to use dual-analog controls.
2.  First console with an end-user programmable system & tools (Net Yaroze)
3.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of DVD.
4.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of Blu-Ray discs. 
5.  First home console to utilize VR (coming this year!)
6.  Ushered in the era of 3D polygon graphics (Saturn sucked and was built around 2D sprites)
7.  Moved gaming from being considered "a kid's toy" to being an acceptable pastime for adults.
8.  First console to sell over 100 million units.
9.  PS2 is best selling console of all time with over 150 million units sold.
10.  Exclusive home to some of the most important games in history (Final Fantasy VII, Castlevania Symphony of the Night, Metal Gear Solid)
11.  Knocked Nintendo down a peg or two, relegating them to second place.
12.  Damaged Sega so badly, they went software-only.

Honestly, you can say that all game makers copied and iterated on what other did before them.  It's the nature of the beast.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 25, 2016, 02:30:41 pm
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.

The cargo pants are ugly. I assume that is what you were referring to in the picture.

Now I get the vacuum cleaner reference. I didn't know what that was behind it.

IMO, Genny model one kind of looks like a waffle maker, CD model two kind of looks like a trash can, and 32x is a deformed mushroom or cyclops. But Genny model two by itself, looks cooler than SNES model 1 or 2.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 02:35:35 pm
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.

The cargo pants are ugly. I assume that is what you were referring to in the picture.
Nah, I dig the cargo pants.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 02:49:40 pm
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.

The cargo pants are ugly. I assume that is what you were referring to in the picture.
Nah, I dig the cargo pants.

You can tell those pants are owned by one sexy studious Genesis owner. Those pants can do what Jeansdon't. Makes me think there could be more Sega add ons hiding in them. 

P.S. I'm not sure this thread feels safe anymore for me.

(http://s28.postimg.org/u7xxf928d/cry.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 25, 2016, 03:42:49 pm
That is by far the ugliest thing I have ever seen.

The cargo pants are ugly. I assume that is what you were referring to in the picture.
Nah, I dig the cargo pants.

You can tell those pants are owned by one sexy studious Genesis owner. Those pants can do what Jeansdon't. Makes me think there could be more Sega add ons hiding in them. 

P.S. I'm not sure this thread feels safe anymore for me.

(http://s28.postimg.org/u7xxf928d/cry.jpg)
Oh don't get me wrong, Cargo pants are cool, but jeans are better.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 25, 2016, 03:49:12 pm
Cargo pants are easier to get around in, very versatile with those large pouches, can have camouflage for strategic missions. Jeans have been the standby forever so people get complacent and just grab them from their closet without really thinking of all the benefits they are missing if they switched to cargo pants.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: wartoy on January 25, 2016, 06:29:25 pm
loved both systems,snes was better but have much love for genesis and shinning force series.nintendo had no strategy rpgs at the time.at least not that i know of.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: maximo310 on January 25, 2016, 07:14:15 pm
loved both systems,snes was better but have much love for genesis and shinning force series.nintendo had no strategy rpgs at the time.at least not that i know of.
I think koei made a few nobunga's ambition games that got localized, most strategy rpgs did not get localized to the west at the time. So we missed out on Fire Emblem 3,4,and 5, Bahamut Lagoon, Treasure Hunter G, Front Mission, and some other ones as well.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: telly on January 25, 2016, 09:26:06 pm

1.  First console to use dual-analog controls.
2.  First console with an end-user programmable system & tools (Net Yaroze)
3.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of DVD.
4.  First console to utilize the storage capacity of Blu-Ray discs. 
5.  First home console to utilize VR (coming this year!)
6.  Ushered in the era of 3D polygon graphics (Saturn sucked and was built around 2D sprites)
7.  Moved gaming from being considered "a kid's toy" to being an acceptable pastime for adults.
8.  First console to sell over 100 million units.
9.  PS2 is best selling console of all time with over 150 million units sold.
10.  Exclusive home to some of the most important games in history (Final Fantasy VII, Castlevania Symphony of the Night, Metal Gear Solid)
11.  Knocked Nintendo down a peg or two, relegating them to second place.
12.  Damaged Sega so badly, they went software-only.

Honestly, you can say that all game makers copied and iterated on what other did before them.  It's the nature of the beast.

Also don't forget! :) (unless I'm mistaken):

First consoles to include an option for a hard drive
First consoles to feature software updates
First console to directly bring portable games onto their home consoles without the need for additional hardware.
Championed making own games and recordings in house and personal computer use with the Linux and PSX (In addition to Net Yaroze)
Championed backwards compatibility with the PS2 not really seen since the 7800. Again, no need for additional hardware other than a PS1 memory card. All out of the box.

To comment on the general argument, I find this SNES-Genesis argument to be so fascinating. I never had either, and I'm sure that both consoles have their own various great games, but because I didn't grow up with either console I don't have any nostalgic affiliation with one over the other. I want to get into both, but I seriously have no opinion on which is better. I just played my very first Genesis game the other week: Fire Shark. :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 25, 2016, 11:37:34 pm
^ XBox is the first to have a hard-drive, and the first to have game updates via XBox Live (not counting PC on both, of course).
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 04:08:49 am
I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.

I think there are plenty, and you even own some of them sir. Let's see, Rocket Knight Adventures, Revenge of Shinobi and Shadow Dancer, Toejam & Earl, Gunstar Heroes, Vectorman, Castle and World of Illusion, Alisia Dragoon, Phantasy Star II/III/IV, Castlevania Bloodlines, Dynamite Headdy, Ristar, Golden Axe... these are all games that immediately come to mind when I think of the Genesis, and none of those titles are really obscure, or anything. So if none of it stands out to you....

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b5/74/f2/b574f2eb725709460d7ec79a084ab189.jpg)

What I meant was point out what's not already in my collection. :)

I never said the other games weren't good. Since I only own what I want to play it'd be silly of me to own them if I thought they were terrible.

I only said that the Sonic and Streets of Rage games were the standouts to me.

For context the original Sonic and Streets of Rage I played the week they launched at my friends house. It was my first exposure to Genesis ever. Is it really a surprise those have the strongest hold on me all these years later? :)

It's interesting to note that I don't own Comix Zone (yet). But I disagree with the person that said it sucks. I actually thought it was rather creative for its time. TMNT Hyperstone Heist is also very underrated. For folks that think it's too short try playing it on hard. You only get to play all the levels at that difficulty.

I was purely stating which console is technically superior. I stand by my claim.

If you compare the Following games:

Smash TV
Street Fighter II (every release)
Mortal Kombat II

You can't honestly say the Genesis versions are better.

Several other multi-platform releases tell the same story.

Now as far as which had the best gaming lineup. I'd have to say it's a toss up and I ask again for folks to point out the good games that are missing from my library. :)

I agree Gunstar Heroes is a hell of a lot of fun. But I still fire up the original Sonic the Hedgehog or Streets of Rage far more often. Contra Hardcorps is so bone crushingly difficult I've never made it past the first level.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 05:22:28 am
I think part of that is Sonic was Sega's mascot. :) With Nintendo staring out with Mario front and center and Sega bringing Sonic on board after the fact they had to heavily advertise and put him out there.

He was their (very effective) Mario killer.

Other than the titles already mentioned what are some of these lesser known Genesis killer apps you speak of?

I'm not trolling. I have 3 Genesis consoles, 2 game gears and over 80 games for the Genesis.

None (other than Sonic series and Streets of Rage) really stand out to me.

Many here keep talking about the awesomeness of the game library. So I'm not trying to argue that.

I really just want to know what I'm missing.

I think there are plenty, and you even own some of them sir. Let's see, Rocket Knight Adventures, Revenge of Shinobi and Shadow Dancer, Toejam & Earl, Gunstar Heroes, Vectorman, Castle and World of Illusion, Alisia Dragoon, Phantasy Star II/III/IV, Castlevania Bloodlines, Dynamite Headdy, Ristar, Golden Axe... these are all games that immediately come to mind when I think of the Genesis, and none of those titles are really obscure, or anything. So if none of it stands out to you....

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b5/74/f2/b574f2eb725709460d7ec79a084ab189.jpg)

What I meant was point out what's not already in my collection. :)

I never said the other games weren't good. Since I only own what I want to play it'd be silly of me to own them if I thought they were terrible.

I only said that the Sonic and Streets of Rage games were the standouts to me.

For context the original Sonic and Streets of Rage I played the week they launched at my friends house. It was my first exposure to Genesis ever. Is it really a surprise those have the strongest hold on me all these years later? :)

It's interesting to note that I don't own Comix Zone (yet). But I disagree with the person that said it sucks. I actually thought it was rather creative for its time. TMNT Hyperstone Heist is also very underrated. For folks that think it's too short try playing it on hard. You only get to play all the levels at that difficulty.

I was purely stating which console is technically superior. I stand by my claim.

If you compare the Following games:

Smash TV
Street Fighter II (every release)
Mortal Kombat II

You can't honestly say the Genesis versions are better.

Several other multi-platform releases tell the same story.

Now as far as which had the best gaming lineup. I'd have to say it's a toss up and I ask again for folks to point out the good games that are missing from my library. :)

I agree Gunstar Heroes is a hell of a lot of fun. But I still fire up the original Sonic the Hedgehog or Streets of Rage far more often. Contra Hardcorps is so bone crushingly difficult I've never made it past the first level.

I disagree street fighter II on the genesis/ megadrive is better.

More characters, more battle modes sharper less blurry grapics and to top it off the backround music comes way closer to the original arcade. The snes music is done over and not bad but way less superior.

Also for the control pad issue? Just get a 6 button pad controller or an arcade stick It's not like It costs a huge some of money anyways for a one time purchase especially lose ones without a box.

Also that you do not like sega games such as contra since they are to hard should not be something to put in consideration.

Allot of sega games are harder than their snes version, I find castlevania on the snes to be way easier than on the sega doesn;t mean the sega version is bad because your terrible at the game and can't pass lvl 1.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: telly on January 26, 2016, 09:11:45 am
^ XBox is the first to have a hard-drive, and the first to have game updates via XBox Live (not counting PC on both, of course).

Nope, the first PS2 HDD was released in July 2001 in Japan, before the Xbox was even launched. I'll certainly admit that it's only a difference of a few months, but it's there!

I had only heard about the software updates, so I could totally be wrong about which one was first. I couldn't find the release information online. I'm also not counting PC either haha  :)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 11:18:23 am


Also that you do not like sega games such as contra since they are to hard should not be something to put in consideration.

Allot of sega games are harder than their snes version, I find castlevania on the snes to be way easier than on the sega doesn;t mean the sega version is bad because your terrible at the game and can't pass lvl 1.

To be honest since this is just an opinion thread any criteria is fair game.

I'm not even sure dashv was trying to imply that just because Contra was more difficult it made SNES the winner. I thinking he was just stating that the game is brutal.

Now as far as the technical comparisons between the systems (especially regarding Street Fighter). I would say overall the SNES edges out the Genesis version in the overall category, but the Genesis has better gameplay and animations. With the edge the SNES has in power it makes the game look and sound a little nicer.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 11:51:25 am


Also that you do not like sega games such as contra since they are to hard should not be something to put in consideration.

Allot of sega games are harder than their snes version, I find castlevania on the snes to be way easier than on the sega doesn;t mean the sega version is bad because your terrible at the game and can't pass lvl 1.

To be honest since this is just an opinion thread any criteria is fair game.

I'm not even sure dashv was trying to imply that just because Contra was more difficult it made SNES the winner. I thinking he was just stating that the game is brutal.

Now as far as the technical comparisons between the systems (especially regarding Street Fighter). I would say overall the SNES edges out the Genesis version in the overall category, but the Genesis has better gameplay and animations. With the edge the SNES has in power it makes the game look and sound a little nicer.

The sounds effects slightly for snes however for the stage music etc I'll give the win to sega way closer to the arcade and it sounds better than the cheap version on the snes wich isn't bad but it has that snes vibe to it.

Also The sega version has the original intro with a man punching someone in the face wich was removed in the snes version.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 12:12:26 pm


Also that you do not like sega games such as contra since they are to hard should not be something to put in consideration.

Allot of sega games are harder than their snes version, I find castlevania on the snes to be way easier than on the sega doesn;t mean the sega version is bad because your terrible at the game and can't pass lvl 1.

To be honest since this is just an opinion thread any criteria is fair game.

I'm not even sure dashv was trying to imply that just because Contra was more difficult it made SNES the winner. I thinking he was just stating that the game is brutal.

Now as far as the technical comparisons between the systems (especially regarding Street Fighter). I would say overall the SNES edges out the Genesis version in the overall category, but the Genesis has better gameplay and animations. With the edge the SNES has in power it makes the game look and sound a little nicer.

The sounds effects slightly for snes however for the stage music etc I'll give the win to sega way closer to the arcade and it sounds better than the cheap version on the snes wich isn't bad but it has that snes vibe to it.

Also The sega version has the original intro with a man punching someone in the face wich was removed in the snes version.

I agree with you on both points.

Contrary to what some people in this thread have written I think the Genesis was still technically superior to the SNES (Nintendo has always gone cheap on hardware since they know the money is in the software). The Genesis had quicker data transfer made possible by the graphics chipset and DMA controller. Funny that Sega focused on "Blast Processing" when that wasn't what really made the console so powerful. It sounds better for marketing purposes though.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 12:27:02 pm


Also that you do not like sega games such as contra since they are to hard should not be something to put in consideration.

Allot of sega games are harder than their snes version, I find castlevania on the snes to be way easier than on the sega doesn;t mean the sega version is bad because your terrible at the game and can't pass lvl 1.

To be honest since this is just an opinion thread any criteria is fair game.

I'm not even sure dashv was trying to imply that just because Contra was more difficult it made SNES the winner. I thinking he was just stating that the game is brutal.

Now as far as the technical comparisons between the systems (especially regarding Street Fighter). I would say overall the SNES edges out the Genesis version in the overall category, but the Genesis has better gameplay and animations. With the edge the SNES has in power it makes the game look and sound a little nicer.

Nailed it. I never said I didn't like it. Just said I can't get very far in the game. Playing the first level over and over is only fun for so long. :)

I also never said the Genesis versions were bad I just said they were not graphics and sound wise up to the level of SNES most of the time. There are notable exception (like Disney's Aladdin). But overall the snes releases are better. As for comparing two different versions of street fighter 2. You can do that. But that's conveniently ignoring the fact that the Genesis missed out on an entire installment of the game. You are comparing "Special Championship Edition" to the regular edition. Shortly afterward the SNES got a new version that had all the same stuff. I'll let it slide though because There were so many releases of the game it was ridiculous.

Lastly, you seem to think I hate the Genesis. This is simply not true.

Why would I own 3 "bad" consoles and over 80 "bad" games? That's hundreds of dollars of stuff.

You're talking to a guy that owns a Phillips CDi. A genuinely bad console. Even so I have 3 games for it that I play quite frequently. The CDi has clearly superior hardware to the SNES but it's library (with very few exceptions) is terrible. Does my admission that the CDi is technically superior mean I hate SNES? Certainly not!

The Genesis I've already admitted has a great library of its own. But it doesn't change the fact that it's hardware was technically inferior in many ways.

I think it worked out for gamers though because Sega had to be more creative. Aladdin had fewer colors and weaker sound effects than the SNES version but the animation was fabulous because they worked directly with Disney.

Jurassic Park was great because they let you play as Grant or the Raptor.

Mortal Kombat was great because of an awesome cheats menu and the balls to have the real fatalities and blood. Without the blood, fatalities, and cheats MK 1 on SNES would be the unmistakably better version. But the extra touches push the graphically weaker and inferior sounding MK 1 into my "best pick".

If Genesis and Nintendo were exactly the same hardware capability wise, I doubt many of those innovations would have been explored.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 12:41:58 pm
I agree with you on both points.

Contrary to what some people in this thread have written I think the Genesis was still technically superior to the SNES (Nintendo has always gone cheap on hardware since they know the money is in the software). The Genesis had quicker data transfer made possible by the graphics chipset and DMA controller. Funny that Sega focused on "Blast Processing" when that wasn't what really made the console so powerful. It sounds better for marketing purposes though.

The Genesis did have a faster data transfer rate, but it came at the cost of screen resolution and color.  This is evident in nearly every multiplatform title during that period.  Games that the colors had gradient changes were smoother on the SNES and quite pixelated looking on the Genesis.  Look at Lion King and Earthworm Jim for two prime examples.  The Genesis also displayed a lack of graphic effects that were present on the SNES.  Look at Mortal Kombat 3 where smoke wisps around on the "vs" screen on the SNES and there is no effects on the Genesis version. 

Sega tried to counter the continuously improving SNES games that made the graphical gap bigger by each title released, by creating the SVP chipset (Sega Virtual Processor) which was actually inside specific game cartridges.  Unfortunately, it was cost-prohibitively expensive to produce and the only game to utilize it was Virtua Racing.

The SNES on the other hand utilized a wide variety of co-processor chips inside the cartridge of games that required them.  The Super FX chipset used in StarFox is the most well-known, but there were also a wide variety of math coprocessor chipsets utilized by Nintendo and third parties such as CX4, DSP and SA1 or Super Accelerator Chip 1.  Some of these chipsets included additional RAM and faster RAM.  Hence the reason why even after Sega released the 32X, the graphics weren't much different than what the SNES was already producing.  The SNES functioned higher than it's initial specs allowed because the cartridges themselves housed the necessary coprocessors to boost the performance to what was needed.

Also, the SNES had the Super Game Boy add-on which allowed the system to play all Game Boy games as well.  And you didn't need to buy a separate controller to have six buttons, it came standard from day-one.

In summary, the game library of the Genesis was inferior.  The hardware of the Genesis was inferior.  An extra purchase was required for a six button controller because the Genesis controller was inferior. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 12:49:09 pm
The sounds effects slightly for snes however for the stage music etc I'll give the win to sega way closer to the arcade and it sounds better than the cheap version on the snes wich isn't bad but it has that snes vibe to it.

Also The sega version has the original intro with a man punching someone in the face wich was removed in the snes version.

You do realize that there was one version of Street Fighter II on the Genesis (Championship Edition) compared to three versions on the SNES (SFII, SFII Turbo, Super SSFII Turbo)?  The SNES versions were all better sellers than the Genesis version and are widely considered to be superior.

Also, the original intro you are fond of with two generic dudes punching each other was altered on the Genesis from the arcade version where blood was removed.  So the Genesis version didn't even feature the same intro, and it's a crappy intro at that.  It's literally two generic dudebros throwing punches and has absolutely nothing to do with the characters or story of the game.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 12:49:21 pm
^ XBox is the first to have a hard-drive, and the first to have game updates via XBox Live (not counting PC on both, of course).

Nope, the first PS2 HDD was released in July 2001 in Japan, before the Xbox was even launched. I'll certainly admit that it's only a difference of a few months, but it's there!

I had only heard about the software updates, so I could totally be wrong about which one was first. I couldn't find the release information online. I'm also not counting PC either haha  :)

I remembered it coming out for Final Fantasy Online, which was a few years down the road. I'm not in Japan, so I had no idea they did it years earlier.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 26, 2016, 12:49:24 pm
Oh man, if only Sega had released an adapter that would let you play Game Gear games on a Master System or Genesis.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 12:50:35 pm
Oh man, if only Sega had released an adapter that would let you play Game Gear games on a Master System or Genesis.

Why hasn't some retro company done this yet!!! I SOOOO want to have this. I love my Game Boy Player and Super Game Boy.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 26, 2016, 12:51:51 pm
Oh man, if only Sega had released an adapter that would let you play Game Gear games on a Master System or Genesis.

Why hasn't some retro company done this yet!!! I SOOOO want to have this. I love my Game Boy Player and Super Game Boy.
There was a guy who, I believe, destroyed an N64, but the parts of a Game gear inside of it, with some modifications of course, and turned the N64 into a console version of a Game Gear.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 12:54:33 pm
I think it worked out for gamers though because Sega had to be more creative. Aladdin had fewer colors and weaker sound effects than the SNES version but the animation was fabulous because they worked directly with Disney.

I just wanted to point out that the Genesis version of Aladdin was co-developed between Sega and Virgin whereas the SNES version was developed by Capcom.  They were actually two completely different games based off the same movie. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 12:55:34 pm
Oh man, if only Sega had released an adapter that would let you play Game Gear games on a Master System or Genesis.

Why hasn't some retro company done this yet!!! I SOOOO want to have this. I love my Game Boy Player and Super Game Boy.
There was a guy who, I believe, destroyed an N64, but the parts of a Game gear inside of it, with some modifications of course, and turned the N64 into a console version of a Game Gear.

That doesn't help me. I'm talking creating it and selling it, like the Mini Power Base Converter.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 12:56:17 pm
^ XBox is the first to have a hard-drive, and the first to have game updates via XBox Live (not counting PC on both, of course).

Nope, the first PS2 HDD was released in July 2001 in Japan, before the Xbox was even launched. I'll certainly admit that it's only a difference of a few months, but it's there!

I had only heard about the software updates, so I could totally be wrong about which one was first. I couldn't find the release information online. I'm also not counting PC either haha  :)

I remembered it coming out for Final Fantasy Online, which was a few years down the road. I'm not in Japan, so I had no idea they did it years earlier.

Yeah....just another idea Microsoft stole from Sony.   :P

On a serious note, the Japanese PS2 HDD was actually an external drive that connected through a short cable to the back of the PS2 whereas the US and PAL versions fit inside an internal bay on the PS2.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 01:17:06 pm
SNES actually has an inferior processor to the Genesis just because of how slow they clocked it. SNES had to make up for it by dumping as much video and audio to separate processors. This is why most Genesis titles feel smoother and have less scrolling issues (parallax) and games like Sonic are possible. The limitations of the colors and layers on a Genesis hinders the graphics greatly. SNES also had their own DSP chips (Mode 7 and Super FX) and Capcom had the C4 chip built in games to handle the processing power the main unit lacked. They needed these chips to keep up with the Genesis. This is why you see extreme slowdown in Final Fight and Gradius

As far as the controller. The Genesis did not ship originally with 6 buttons, but the Genesis 6 button controller is so much more enjoyable to use for games requiring it compared to the SNES stock controller. My hand cramps thinking about it and I can't tell you how many shoulder buttons are cracked and jacked for my SNES.

Game library is your own choice. The Genesis titles were made for the big boys, and the SNES titles were at the kid's table. It is ok if you like the kid's table at Thanksgiving.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 26, 2016, 01:27:16 pm
SNES actually has an inferior processor to the Genesis just because of how slow they clocked it. SNES had to make up for it by dumping as much video and audio to separate processors. This is why most Genesis titles feel smoother and have less scrolling issues (parallax) and games like Sonic are possible. The limitations of the colors and layers on a Genesis hinders the graphics greatly. SNES also had their own DSP chips (Mode 7 and Super FX) and Capcom had the C4 chip built in games to handle the processing power the main unit lacked. They needed these chips to keep up with the Genesis. This is why you see extreme slowdown in Final Fight and Gradius

As far as the controller. The Genesis did not ship originally with 6 buttons, but the Genesis 6 button controller is so much more enjoyable to use for games requiring it compared to the SNES stock controller. My hand cramps thinking about it and I can't tell you how many shoulder buttons are cracked and jacked for my SNES.

Game library is your own choice. The Genesis titles were made for the big boys, and the SNES titles were at the kid's table. It is ok if you like the kid's table at Thanksgiving.
Yup, because Barney's Hide and Seek is totes a big boy game.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/BarneysHideandSeekGameGenesisScreenshot.gif)

Actually... yeah... that looks pretty adult content to me.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: telly on January 26, 2016, 01:29:41 pm
I remembered it coming out for Final Fantasy Online, which was a few years down the road. I'm not in Japan, so I had no idea they did it years earlier.

It came out much later in the US, in 2004. That's the same year FF XI was released, so that makes a lot of sense. The HDD was used a lot more in Japan than in the US in general; most of the US games that used it were sports games and SOCOM.

Yup, because Barney's Hide and Seek is totes a big boy game.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/BarneysHideandSeekGameGenesisScreenshot.gif)

Actually... yeah... that looks pretty adult content to me.

Don't forget Crystal's Pony Tale for all the bronies out there! That's a man's game :D

(http://vgcollect.com/images/front-box-art/10102.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 02:08:01 pm
The sounds effects slightly for snes however for the stage music etc I'll give the win to sega way closer to the arcade and it sounds better than the cheap version on the snes wich isn't bad but it has that snes vibe to it.

Also The sega version has the original intro with a man punching someone in the face wich was removed in the snes version.

You do realize that there was one version of Street Fighter II on the Genesis (Championship Edition) compared to three versions on the SNES (SFII, SFII Turbo, Super SSFII Turbo)?  The SNES versions were all better sellers than the Genesis version and are widely considered to be superior.

Also, the original intro you are fond of with two generic dudes punching each other was altered on the Genesis from the arcade version where blood was removed.  So the Genesis version didn't even feature the same intro, and it's a crappy intro at that.  It's literally two generic dudebros throwing punches and has absolutely nothing to do with the characters or story of the game.

Seriously Are you really that smart?

Guess not, do some research, the genesis has street fighter champion edition and super street fighter II wich I own both.

Street fighter champion edition in snes is street fighter II turbo, still with the sega leaving more battle mode options compared to the snes version.

However that so called extra game Street fighter II on snes is just street fighter turbo with way less options and 4 less characters pretty much in playable aspect a waste since it could have been done with turbo only.

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not street fighter II turbo just saying.

Also the cut scene in the sega version is still pretty nice aside from it being nerfed in matter of blood and that a white guy was actually punching a black guy wich was really cruel at the time aside from that it is pretty much the same.

I admit the original from the arcades and on ps1 upwards consoles is better but it still is an awesome intro scene the best in the street fighter series aside from it being nerfed on the genesis. If you do not like that intro than your no street fighter fan since that intro is a true classic, all the other street fighter intro's are rather boring, this one is pure goodness of that time period with the humour of the time. Two dudes beating eachother up It's classic.

Street fighter games with story? seriously nobody give a damm. The king of fighter has a better story line than street fighter anways.

Also regarding controllers, were talking about nowadays not back in the day when controllers were expensive as ****. If your a serious genesis/megadrive player You'll get yourself an arcade and or 6 button pad controller. Controllers are not really the issue here especially lose ones. As a megadrive fan myself I have 2 arcade sticks in the box with manuals etc and 2 6 button wireless padds controllers.

So what you'll lose 20-25 dollars on an arcade stick? who cares It's not like your going broke or something for a one time purchase.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 02:31:14 pm
SNES actually has an inferior processor to the Genesis just because of how slow they clocked it. SNES had to make up for it by dumping as much video and audio to separate processors. This is why most Genesis titles feel smoother and have less scrolling issues (parallax) and games like Sonic are possible. The limitations of the colors and layers on a Genesis hinders the graphics greatly. SNES also had their own DSP chips (Mode 7 and Super FX) and Capcom had the C4 chip built in games to handle the processing power the main unit lacked. They needed these chips to keep up with the Genesis. This is why you see extreme slowdown in Final Fight and Gradius

As far as the controller. The Genesis did not ship originally with 6 buttons, but the Genesis 6 button controller is so much more enjoyable to use for games requiring it compared to the SNES stock controller. My hand cramps thinking about it and I can't tell you how many shoulder buttons are cracked and jacked for my SNES.

Game library is your own choice. The Genesis titles were made for the big boys, and the SNES titles were at the kid's table. It is ok if you like the kid's table at Thanksgiving.

I wouldn't say that it needed those extra chips to keep up with the Genesis because by most accounts, SNES games look and sound better than Genesis games.  You also can't say that the SNES processor was inferior because Nintendo chose to clock it at a lower speed.

As for the controller, optional controllers with six face buttons were available for the SNES as well.  That's a moot point.  The point is that the stock Genesis controller lacked three buttons.  Four if you count the select button which many SNES games utilized for different functions.  I win.

Your comment about Genesis being for the big boys?  You forgot the sarcasm tag.  Preference varies, but the SNES had a huge library of more adult-oriented titles than Genesis.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 02:38:45 pm
Seriously Are you really that smart?

Guess not, do some research, the genesis has street fighter champion edition and super street fighter II wich I own both.

Street fighter champion edition in snes is street fighter II turbo, still with the sega leaving more battle mode options compared to the snes version.

However that so called extra game Street fighter II on snes is just street fighter turbo with way less options and 4 less characters pretty much in playable aspect a waste since it could have been done with turbo only.

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not street fighter II turbo just saying.

Also the cut scene in the sega version is still pretty nice aside from it being nerfed in matter of blood and that a white guy was actually punching a black guy wich was really cruel at the time aside from that it is pretty much the same.

I admit the original from the arcades and on ps1 upwards consoles is better but it still is an awesome intro scene the best in the street fighter series aside from it being nerfed on the genesis. If you do not like that intro than your no street fighter fan since that intro is a true classic, all the other street fighter intro's are rather boring, this one is pure goodness of that time period with the humour of the time. Two dudes beating eachother up It's classic.

Street fighter games with story? seriously nobody give a damm. The king of fighter has a better story line than street fighter anways.

Also regarding controllers, were talking about nowadays not back in the day when controllers were expensive as ****. If your a serious genesis/megadrive player You'll get yourself an arcade and or 6 button pad controller. Controllers are not really the issue here especially lose ones. As a megadrive fan myself I have 2 arcade sticks in the box with manuals etc and 2 6 button wireless padds controllers.

So what you'll lose 20-25 dollars on an arcade stick? who cares It's not like your going broke or something for a one time purchase.

Have you ever seen the movie One Flew Over the Cookoos Nest?  Just wondering.

While I may have been wrong on the number of entries released of Street Fighter per system, you are arguing semantics.  Does it really matter?  SNES had more releases.

You say "who cares" about the storyline in Street Fighter, yet talk about how great a crappy cutscene with what today would be labeled a hate-crime is and how it makes one version better?  Yeah.  Sure.

Since this is a comparison of the Genesis and SNES, it makes sense that we compare the systems in their heyday.  Sure you can buy a six button controller on the cheap these days.  You can also find a ton of Genesis units at yard sales, recycling centers and Goodwill stores for under ten bucks while a SNES still commands upwards of $80.  What's your point?  I found an original Genesis in a field where somebody threw it years ago judging by the fading.  I can show pics to prove it.  Never found a SNES chucked to the wayside like that.

You seem to be taking this thread entirely too seriously.  It's ok to prefer Genesis to SNES.  Some people prefer a Pintos to Ferraris.   :P

BTW....just checked the local game store.  You are right, I am wrong.  There are two versions of SF on the Genesis.  They have about 50 of them in the $5 and under bargain bin complete in box.  Cart only SNES versions are $25 and up.   ;)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 02:44:32 pm
SNES actually has an inferior processor to the Genesis just because of how slow they clocked it. SNES had to make up for it by dumping as much video and audio to separate processors. This is why most Genesis titles feel smoother and have less scrolling issues (parallax) and games like Sonic are possible. The limitations of the colors and layers on a Genesis hinders the graphics greatly. SNES also had their own DSP chips (Mode 7 and Super FX) and Capcom had the C4 chip built in games to handle the processing power the main unit lacked. They needed these chips to keep up with the Genesis. This is why you see extreme slowdown in Final Fight and Gradius

As far as the controller. The Genesis did not ship originally with 6 buttons, but the Genesis 6 button controller is so much more enjoyable to use for games requiring it compared to the SNES stock controller. My hand cramps thinking about it and I can't tell you how many shoulder buttons are cracked and jacked for my SNES.

Game library is your own choice. The Genesis titles were made for the big boys, and the SNES titles were at the kid's table. It is ok if you like the kid's table at Thanksgiving.

Genesis did have a pretty good CPU. I admit better than the SNES. But it had to because it had no special graphics processors and a severely limited color palette.

All the speed in the world could not help FMV running on the Genesis with its limited color palette.

The SNES offered a color palette 5 times larger (and much brighter) and made up for its slow processor by off loading most of the heavy lifting (graphics) to dedicated hardware. Things like scaling, rotation, and transparency were all done by specialized hardware on the SNES. The Genesis on the other hand had to either fake it. Or try to brute force it with all the extra cpu it had.

At the time with low-res crts faking transparency was no big deal. But now with high resolution non-interlaced displays the Genesis' cheats are not aging as well as the SNES.

Places where they faked transparency using dithering and "every other frame" rendering are obvious. For example Sonic's shield.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 02:52:23 pm
Genesis did have a pretty good CPU. I admit better than the SNES. But it had to because it had no special graphics processors and a severely limited color palette.

All the speed in the world could not help FMV running on the Genesis with its limited color palette.

The SNES offered a color palette 5 times larger (and much brighter) and made up for its slow processor by off loading most of the heavy lifting (graphics) to dedicated hardware. Things like scaling, rotation, and transparency were all done by specialized hardware on the SNES. The Genesis on the other hand had to either fake it. Or try to brute force it with all the extra cpu it had.

At the time with low red crts faking transparency was no big deal. But now with high resolution non-interlaced displays the Genesis' cheats are not aging as well as the SNES.

Places where they faked transparency using dithering and "every other frame) rendering are obvious. For example Sonic's shield.

SUCK THAT GENESIS!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 02:53:50 pm
With Genesis, there was a whole lot more good games getting released. However, with SNES, it seemed a few masterpieces really outshined that steady stream of good games Sega was giving us.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 02:59:42 pm
Seriously Are you really that smart?

Guess not, do some research, the genesis has street fighter champion edition and super street fighter II wich I own both.

Street fighter champion edition in snes is street fighter II turbo, still with the sega leaving more battle mode options compared to the snes version.

However that so called extra game Street fighter II on snes is just street fighter turbo with way less options and 4 less characters pretty much in playable aspect a waste since it could have been done with turbo only.

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not street fighter II turbo just saying.

Also the cut scene in the sega version is still pretty nice aside from it being nerfed in matter of blood and that a white guy was actually punching a black guy wich was really cruel at the time aside from that it is pretty much the same.

I admit the original from the arcades and on ps1 upwards consoles is better but it still is an awesome intro scene the best in the street fighter series aside from it being nerfed on the genesis. If you do not like that intro than your no street fighter fan since that intro is a true classic, all the other street fighter intro's are rather boring, this one is pure goodness of that time period with the humour of the time. Two dudes beating eachother up It's classic.

Street fighter games with story? seriously nobody give a damm. The king of fighter has a better story line than street fighter anways.

Also regarding controllers, were talking about nowadays not back in the day when controllers were expensive as ****. If your a serious genesis/megadrive player You'll get yourself an arcade and or 6 button pad controller. Controllers are not really the issue here especially lose ones. As a megadrive fan myself I have 2 arcade sticks in the box with manuals etc and 2 6 button wireless padds controllers.

So what you'll lose 20-25 dollars on an arcade stick? who cares It's not like your going broke or something for a one time purchase.

Have you ever seen the movie One Flew Over the Cookoos Nest?  Just wondering.

While I may have been wrong on the number of entries released of Street Fighter per system, you are arguing semantics.  Does it really matter?  SNES had more releases.

You say "who cares" about the storyline in Street Fighter, yet talk about how great a crappy cutscene with what today would be labeled a hate-crime is and how it makes one version better?  Yeah.  Sure.

Since this is a comparison of the Genesis and SNES, it makes sense that we compare the systems in their heyday.  Sure you can buy a six button controller on the cheap these days.  You can also find a ton of Genesis units at yard sales, recycling centers and Goodwill stores for under ten bucks while a SNES still commands upwards of $80.  What's your point?  I found an original Genesis in a field where somebody threw it years ago judging by the fading.  I can show pics to prove it.  Never found a SNES chucked to the wayside like that.

You seem to be taking this thread entirely too seriously.  It's ok to prefer Genesis to SNES.  Some people prefer a Pintos to Ferraris.   :P

BTW....just checked the local game store.  You are right, I am wrong.  There are two versions of SF on the Genesis.  They have about 50 of them in the $5 and under bargain bin complete in box.  Cart only SNES versions are $25 and up.   ;)

me? look at your self with those comments. I'm just telling the fact besides a cut scene is not about story especially back in the day when it was just so that people could brawl it out agains each other. That cut scene is a true classic, nobody cares about the story line when playing street fighter.

Snes had more releases for street fighter but we both know that street fighter II is a street fighter turbo with 4 less characters and less battle modes than turbo otherwise the same **** game. Sega started at turbo since there is no use in producing an enferior game with less options than it already should have from the very beginning.

Also If your game store has 50 complete in box copies of street fighter for the genesis for 5 $ I would happily buy them all since they go for way more.

I'm sorry for you that you are so butthurt
that sega is better in some ways.  It is thanks to many people like you that nintendo is so overpriced nowadays. I don't care since I've managed to snagg some great sega games for nothing or bargain prices (my entire collection) while they would go for more since way less people care about sega.

I like nintendo I'm a mario fan but the genesis/megadrive is better than the snes. Sega just gives the better arcade feel.

I'll give you your win for the nes vs the master system though if that helps you sleep at night  8)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 03:00:12 pm
I'm not willing to turn a small village into a glass parking lot over street fighter.

Even with the internet it's hard to follow the pedigree of the slew of releases. I don't personally own every single street fighter game. So that's my bad for going on my small personal sample set and Internet research.

I think I'm gonna leave the thread now.

The tone is getting far too confrontational and much of the stuff I'm saying is getting taken way out of context.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 03:01:24 pm
So Sega got SFII later than SNES? ...fail to see how that's better.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 26, 2016, 03:09:29 pm

Seriously Are you really that smart?

Guess not, do some research, the genesis has street fighter champion edition and super street fighter II wich I own both.

Street fighter champion edition in snes is street fighter II turbo, still with the sega leaving more battle mode options compared to the snes version.

However that so called extra game Street fighter II on snes is just street fighter turbo with way less options and 4 less characters pretty much in playable aspect a waste since it could have been done with turbo only.

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not street fighter II turbo just saying.

Also the cut scene in the sega version is still pretty nice aside from it being nerfed in matter of blood and that a white guy was actually punching a black guy wich was really cruel at the time aside from that it is pretty much the same.

I admit the original from the arcades and on ps1 upwards consoles is better but it still is an awesome intro scene the best in the street fighter series aside from it being nerfed on the genesis. If you do not like that intro than your no street fighter fan since that intro is a true classic, all the other street fighter intro's are rather boring, this one is pure goodness of that time period with the humour of the time. Two dudes beating eachother up It's classic.

Street fighter games with story? seriously nobody give a damm. The king of fighter has a better story line than street fighter anways.

Also regarding controllers, were talking about nowadays not back in the day when controllers were expensive as ****. If your a serious genesis/megadrive player You'll get yourself an arcade and or 6 button pad controller. Controllers are not really the issue here especially lose ones. As a megadrive fan myself I have 2 arcade sticks in the box with manuals etc and 2 6 button wireless padds controllers.

So what you'll lose 20-25 dollars on an arcade stick? who cares It's not like your going broke or something for a one time purchase.
What?  All of the versions of Street Fighter 2 are different.

It goes in order Street Fighter II(SNES), Street Fighter II: Special Champion Edition (Genesis),  Street Fighter II Turbo: Hyper Fighting (SNES) [Notice it doesn't actually have "SUPER" like you claim], Super Street Fighter II (SNES and Genesis), and finally Super Street Fighter II Turbo (3DO).  I won't go past that into the collections and HD remix.

Liking or disliking an intro video, which has nothing to do with the characters or anything, does not equate to being a "true" fan.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 03:11:46 pm
This thread has become a little too serious perhaps. My comments that were not actual facts were just made in jest (kid's table). I actually could care less which console is better as long as we all know that the PCE was better than the SNES too. :p
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 03:16:40 pm

Seriously Are you really that smart?

Guess not, do some research, the genesis has street fighter champion edition and super street fighter II wich I own both.

Street fighter champion edition in snes is street fighter II turbo, still with the sega leaving more battle mode options compared to the snes version.

However that so called extra game Street fighter II on snes is just street fighter turbo with way less options and 4 less characters pretty much in playable aspect a waste since it could have been done with turbo only.

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not street fighter II turbo just saying.

Also the cut scene in the sega version is still pretty nice aside from it being nerfed in matter of blood and that a white guy was actually punching a black guy wich was really cruel at the time aside from that it is pretty much the same.

I admit the original from the arcades and on ps1 upwards consoles is better but it still is an awesome intro scene the best in the street fighter series aside from it being nerfed on the genesis. If you do not like that intro than your no street fighter fan since that intro is a true classic, all the other street fighter intro's are rather boring, this one is pure goodness of that time period with the humour of the time. Two dudes beating eachother up It's classic.

Street fighter games with story? seriously nobody give a damm. The king of fighter has a better story line than street fighter anways.

Also regarding controllers, were talking about nowadays not back in the day when controllers were expensive as ****. If your a serious genesis/megadrive player You'll get yourself an arcade and or 6 button pad controller. Controllers are not really the issue here especially lose ones. As a megadrive fan myself I have 2 arcade sticks in the box with manuals etc and 2 6 button wireless padds controllers.

So what you'll lose 20-25 dollars on an arcade stick? who cares It's not like your going broke or something for a one time purchase.
What?  All of the versions of Street Fighter 2 are different.

It goes in order Street Fighter II(SNES), Street Fighter II: Special Champion Edition (Genesis),  Street Fighter II Turbo: Hyper Fighting (SNES) [Notice it doesn't actually have "SUPER" like you claim], Super Street Fighter II (SNES and Genesis), and finally Super Street Fighter II Turbo (3DO).  I won't go past that into the collections and HD remix.

Liking or disliking an intro video, which has nothing to do with the characters or anything, does not equate to being a "true" fan.



actually meant to say this

Also another mistake on your part on the snes It's super street fighter II, not super street fighter II turbo just saying.

About the intro scene it is the classic street fighter intro. In my opinion the best intro for the street fighter series I might have exaggerate the true fan thing. Still though I do find the other intro's to be less entertaining.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 03:19:29 pm
me? look at your self with those comments. I'm just telling the fact besides a cut scene is not about story especially back in the day when it was just so that people could brawl it out agains each other. That cut scene is a true classic, nobody cares about the story line when playing street fighter.

Snes had more releases for street fighter but we both know that street fighter II is a street fighter turbo with 4 less characters and less battle modes than turbo otherwise the same **** game. Sega started at turbo since there is no use in producing an enferior game with less options than it already should have from the very beginning.

Also If your game store has 50 complete in box copies of street fighter for the genesis for 5 $ I would happily buy them all since they go for way more.

I'm sorry for you that you are so butthurt
that sega is better in some ways.  It is thanks to many people like you that nintendo is so overpriced nowadays. I don't care since I've managed to snagg some great sega games for nothing or bargain prices (my entire collection) while they would go for more since way less people care about sega.

I like nintendo I'm a mario fan but the genesis/megadrive is better than the snes. Sega just gives the better arcade feel.

I'll give you your win for the nes vs the master system though if that helps you sleep at night  8)


What's classic about a animated gif of a white guy punching a black guy, screen pans up and you see the Street Fighter logo on a building?  It's tripe.

The reason Sega's first version of Street Fighter II is turbo and it came out a year later than vanilla SFII on the SNES is because Sega had to grovel at the feet of Capcom and beg for a version. 

Your next few replies show you've completely lost your marbles.  It's because people like me that Nintendo stuff is so overpriced these days?  First, I don't collect Nintendo stuff earlier than the Gamecube at the moment.  Second, did it ever occur to you that NES and SNES stuff is rising because PEOPLE ACTUALLY WANT THEM???  Same reason you have been able to snag your Sega stuff for "nothing or bargain prices" as you stated.  Because it's not in demand.  Because it's not as good.  Because Sega is a fart in the wind.  They don't even make very many games anymore and most of the ones the do make suck. 

I'm not losing any sleep.  I don't need to feel better.  And I'm surely not butthurt.  Take a look in the mirror to see the butthurt.  You are obviously angered by opinions that differ from yours.  ABOUT.  VIDEO.  GAMES.  Take a chill pill dude and realize that you are the one getting all "up in your feelings" because Genesis is inferior to SNES.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 03:20:40 pm
This thread has become a little too serious perhaps. My comments that were not actual facts were just made in jest (kid's table). I actually could care less which console is better as long as we all know that the PCE was better than the SNES too. :p

LOL...I think sworddudebro is gonna stroke out.  Some people just get too worked up about video games when they backed the wrong horse.   :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 03:27:51 pm
On a side note - this thread has made me so angry I smashed a dookie in my SNES instead of a cartridge and it booted up and looked just like Race Drivin. I then went to get my Race Drivin cartridge to compare the two. My dokie ended up having better controls and a faster frame rate.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 26, 2016, 03:31:49 pm
me? look at your self with those comments. I'm just telling the fact besides a cut scene is not about story especially back in the day when it was just so that people could brawl it out agains each other. That cut scene is a true classic, nobody cares about the story line when playing street fighter.

Snes had more releases for street fighter but we both know that street fighter II is a street fighter turbo with 4 less characters and less battle modes than turbo otherwise the same **** game. Sega started at turbo since there is no use in producing an enferior game with less options than it already should have from the very beginning.

Also If your game store has 50 complete in box copies of street fighter for the genesis for 5 $ I would happily buy them all since they go for way more.

I'm sorry for you that you are so butthurt
that sega is better in some ways.  It is thanks to many people like you that nintendo is so overpriced nowadays. I don't care since I've managed to snagg some great sega games for nothing or bargain prices (my entire collection) while they would go for more since way less people care about sega.

I like nintendo I'm a mario fan but the genesis/megadrive is better than the snes. Sega just gives the better arcade feel.

I'll give you your win for the nes vs the master system though if that helps you sleep at night  8)


What's classic about a animated gif of a white guy punching a black guy, screen pans up and you see the Street Fighter logo on a building?  It's tripe.

The reason Sega's first version of Street Fighter II is turbo and it came out a year later than vanilla SFII on the SNES is because Sega had to grovel at the feet of Capcom and beg for a version. 

Your next few replies show you've completely lost your marbles.  It's because people like me that Nintendo stuff is so overpriced these days?  First, I don't collect Nintendo stuff earlier than the Gamecube at the moment.  Second, did it ever occur to you that NES and SNES stuff is rising because PEOPLE ACTUALLY WANT THEM???  Same reason you have been able to snag your Sega stuff for "nothing or bargain prices" as you stated.  Because it's not in demand.  Because it's not as good.  Because Sega is a fart in the wind.  They don't even make very many games anymore and most of the ones the do make suck. 

I'm not losing any sleep.  I don't need to feel better.  And I'm surely not butthurt.  Take a look in the mirror to see the butthurt.  You are obviously angered by opinions that differ from yours.  ABOUT.  VIDEO.  GAMES.  Take a chill pill dude and realize that you are the one getting all "up in your feelings" because Genesis is inferior to SNES.

Talk to the Hand
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 03:33:19 pm
On a side note - this thread has made me so angry I smashed a dookie in my SNES instead of a cartridge and it booted up and looked just like Race Drivin. I then went to get my Race Drivin cartridge to compare the two. My dokie ended up having better controls and a faster frame rate.

LOL!   :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ignition365 on January 26, 2016, 03:36:56 pm
Talk to the Hand
(http://www.funnymemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/funny-memes-this-is-shit-getting-out-of-hand.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 03:38:11 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 03:54:45 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 26, 2016, 04:18:51 pm
I haven't given my two cents yet. I'm team SNES for a variety of reasons.

1. Childhood memories; we got the SNES as a gift for Christmas
2. Better RPGs
3. The Mega Man X games
4. Kirby games
5. More comfy controller

That being said, I adore the Genesis. While the three-button to six-button controller is kind of a prelude to what would later be known as DLC, the Genesis had its fair share of neat games and I really liked its version of Samurai Showdown better.


I'm sorry for you that you are so butthurt
that sega is better in some ways. 

Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 04:40:36 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 04:55:02 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.

It was in 1989 that in the USA the government made it a law that all toy guns had to have orange tips. So kids having guns was very much on people's minds. It is even why the second iteration of the NES gun came in neon orange. The "16 bit" generation was also when Nintendo and Sega both had to appear before the US Senate to discuss video game violence. I think marketing a gun in this new generation wold have been bad form and both companies knew it.

I stand by my initial analysis, but I would love to hear if someone else has a different thought.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 26, 2016, 07:45:23 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.

It was in 1989 that in the USA the government made it a law that all toy guns had to have orange tips. So kids having guns was very much on people's minds. It is even why the second iteration of the NES gun came in neon orange. The "16 bit" generation was also when Nintendo and Sega both had to appear before the US Senate to discuss video game violence. I think marketing a gun in this new generation wold have been bad form and both companies knew it.

I stand by my initial analysis, but I would love to hear if someone else has a different thought.

It is possible. It is hard, if not impossible, to find out when Nintendo and SEGA were aware of government interest in video game violence. From what I understand from many accounts, Nintendo and SEGA were both tipped off about the future hearings from a toy industry contact with a decent heads up before everything got started. I suspect this is 1993 (well into a year after the scopes were introduced)

Key Dates
Super Scope - February 92
SEGA Video Game Rating - June 93 (first sign that SEGA knew something. Would be implemented quickly.)
Congressional hearing - Dec 9 1993
Release of Doom - Dec 10 1993 (I love this date. One day after the hearing)

My suspicion is that the bazooka is just the next step from the light gun design and followed the current trend in the arcades the year before. It is the "super" version. You also had a move in the arcades to bigger guns such as the T2 arcade game in 91. In the early 90s bazookas and machine guns were cool in America. And light guns were marketed toward Americans. You also saw a return to traditional guns in consoles in the mid 90s when arcades mimicked those with point blank, virtue cop, etc.. I imagine it just followed the arcades.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 26, 2016, 08:01:02 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.

It was in 1989 that in the USA the government made it a law that all toy guns had to have orange tips. So kids having guns was very much on people's minds. It is even why the second iteration of the NES gun came in neon orange. The "16 bit" generation was also when Nintendo and Sega both had to appear before the US Senate to discuss video game violence. I think marketing a gun in this new generation wold have been bad form and both companies knew it.

I stand by my initial analysis, but I would love to hear if someone else has a different thought.

I forgot about that. I remember when I was a kid hearing about the story that sparked that. Some kid in a car waived his toy gun at a cop and the kid got shot (or something like that) because the gun looked so real.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 08:08:16 pm
Talk to the Hand
(http://www.funnymemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/funny-memes-this-is-shit-getting-out-of-hand.jpg)

LMAO!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 26, 2016, 08:09:28 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.

It was in 1989 that in the USA the government made it a law that all toy guns had to have orange tips. So kids having guns was very much on people's minds. It is even why the second iteration of the NES gun came in neon orange. The "16 bit" generation was also when Nintendo and Sega both had to appear before the US Senate to discuss video game violence. I think marketing a gun in this new generation wold have been bad form and both companies knew it.

I stand by my initial analysis, but I would love to hear if someone else has a different thought.

I forgot about that. I remember when I was a kid hearing about the story that sparked that. Some kid in a car waived his toy gun at a cop and the kid got shot (or something like that) because the gun looked so real.

Every toy gun since then has at least an orange end on the barrel.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 09:22:42 pm
Why didn't either system have an official light-gun? I've always wondered that. The stupid bazookas they put out were wieldly and not fun to play with.

We did get the Lethal Enforcers gun, but that was only for Konami games.

I mean, how cool would T2: The Arcade Game have been if we were actually able to use a gun?!

My guess is it had a lot to do with the timeframe of the consoles. Hand guns in kid's hands didn't sound like a good idea any more. And games in this time period were very much considered as toys more so than in the late 70's and early 80's.

The NES and Master System had light-guns before it. And arcades had guns during the SNES and Genesis era. I don't think people were wary about kids playing with guns quite yet, Columbine hadn't happened yet.

It was in 1989 that in the USA the government made it a law that all toy guns had to have orange tips. So kids having guns was very much on people's minds. It is even why the second iteration of the NES gun came in neon orange. The "16 bit" generation was also when Nintendo and Sega both had to appear before the US Senate to discuss video game violence. I think marketing a gun in this new generation wold have been bad form and both companies knew it.

I stand by my initial analysis, but I would love to hear if someone else has a different thought.

It is possible. It is hard, if not impossible, to find out when Nintendo and SEGA were aware of government interest in video game violence. From what I understand from many accounts, Nintendo and SEGA were both tipped off about the future hearings from a toy industry contact with a decent heads up before everything got started. I suspect this is 1993 (well into a year after the scopes were introduced)

Key Dates
Super Scope - February 92
SEGA Video Game Rating - June 93 (first sign that SEGA knew something. Would be implemented quickly.)
Congressional hearing - Dec 9 1993
Release of Doom - Dec 10 1993 (I love this date. One day after the hearing)

My suspicion is that the bazooka is just the next step from the light gun design and followed the current trend in the arcades the year before. It is the "super" version. You also had a move in the arcades to bigger guns such as the T2 arcade game in 91. In the early 90s bazookas and machine guns were cool in America. And light guns were marketed toward Americans. You also saw a return to traditional guns in consoles in the mid 90s when arcades mimicked those with point blank, virtue cop, etc.. I imagine it just followed the arcades.

Back since the thread seems to have cooled down.

1993 is when Howard Lincoln and the big wigs at SEGA were brought before congress. Here are the entire proceedings recorded from cspan:

http://youtu.be/AwIfnS1ewgQ

Here's another where they actually watch footage from Night Trap and blow it way out of proportion:
http://youtu.be/nD-Afpg4P2U

That ones dated 12/9/1993

Howard Lincoln of Nintendo threw SEGA so far under the bus I'm sure they could have read off the license plate if asked.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 26, 2016, 09:35:05 pm
Around 12:30 in the second video they show the box art for Lethal Enforcers.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 26, 2016, 10:02:46 pm
It is possible. It is hard, if not impossible, to find out when Nintendo and SEGA were aware of government interest in video game violence. From what I understand from many accounts, Nintendo and SEGA were both tipped off about the future hearings from a toy industry contact with a decent heads up before everything got started. I suspect this is 1993 (well into a year after the scopes were introduced)

Key Dates
Super Scope - February 92
SEGA Video Game Rating - June 93 (first sign that SEGA knew something. Would be implemented quickly.)
Congressional hearing - Dec 9 1993
Release of Doom - Dec 10 1993 (I love this date. One day after the hearing)

My suspicion is that the bazooka is just the next step from the light gun design and followed the current trend in the arcades the year before. It is the "super" version. You also had a move in the arcades to bigger guns such as the T2 arcade game in 91. In the early 90s bazookas and machine guns were cool in America. And light guns were marketed toward Americans. You also saw a return to traditional guns in consoles in the mid 90s when arcades mimicked those with point blank, virtue cop, etc.. I imagine it just followed the arcades.

I could buy into this analysis. By the way I love your Sega Ages videos on YouTube.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: DreamsDied13101 on January 27, 2016, 01:39:40 am


Yeah....just another idea Microsoft stole from Sony.   :P


You definitely love Sony and not Sega. Do you boycott the longbox releases of games like Battle Arena Toshinden and Rayman that had Saturn cases? In the end it was good news for Sony that they ran out of cases and had to go buy them from Sega who had blown the American market when they launched the Saturn. Funny how amazing the Saturn did in Japan and bombed in USA. I don't think Sony caught up with Sega in Japan for about two years (when Final Fantasy VII came out). Poor Nintendo 64 never caught up in Japan.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kamikazekeeg on January 27, 2016, 05:44:49 am
I personally think the SNES is far more impactful with its library.  Not that there aren't any good games on the Genesis, but with the likes of Final Fantasy, Super Mario World, Chrono Trigger, A Link To The Past, Mega Man X, and others, there's just a lot of heavy hitters compared to the Genesis.  Also I've noticed a lot more stuff I've seen on the Genesis nowadays doesn't hold up like I remember.  Even Sonic that I use to remember liking isn't very fun to play compared to something that still plays great and fun like Super Mario World.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 27, 2016, 12:41:36 pm
I agree on the SNES being better...But Sonic isn't fun anymore...whhhaaa??
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 27, 2016, 12:54:37 pm
I agree on the SNES being better...But Sonic isn't fun anymore...whhhaaa??

I think Sonic is still fun in small doses.  I always liked Sonic and it was a high point for me with the Genesis when it came out.  I remember buying Sonic 2 and sending a coupon in to Sega, receiving a free complete in box copy of the original Sonic.  Man...those were the days.  By the time Sonic 3 came out, the series was wearing itself thin for me.  Sonic and Knuckles pretty much broke me.  Even with the lock-on gimmick that added stuff to the old games....it was done for me.

I tried to like Sonic Adventure and it had fun parts.  But much like Mario's transition to 3D with Mario 64, something was lost for me.  I had no problem running around as Spyro, Crash, Croc or any number of other characters in a 3D world.  But Sonic and Mario always seemed like they should have stayed in the 2D realm of gaming.  It just never clicked for me.  I guess that's why when stuff like Sonic Anniversary and New Super Mario Bros. came out with the classic 2D gameplay, I was all over them like stink on $hit. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 27, 2016, 12:55:28 pm
It's funny that people always mention the SNES JRPGs, but back in the day I never even knew those games existed, because I never knew anyone who played them. I only first heard of many of them when I got back into classic games. Square Soft and Enix games as I've come to know them, don't make much of an impression on me, so that's probably why I see the SNES and Genesis at a more level playing field.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 27, 2016, 01:13:11 pm
It's funny that people always mention the SNES JRPGs, but back in the day I never even knew those games existed, because I never knew anyone who played them. I only first heard of many of them when I got back into classic games. Square Soft and Enix games as I've come to know them, don't wow me a whole lot, so that's probably why I see the SNES and Genesis at a more level playing field.

Wow...I can see how that would definitely affect your perception of the SNES.  Chrono Trigger alone left a huge impression on me.  I still remember those old commercials where at the end, the Japanese guy said "CHRONO TRIGGER!"  ActRaiser was a game I bought day-n-date with my SNES purchase.  Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Final Fantasy II & III (V and VI in Japan), Secret of Evermore, Super Mario RPG, ActRaiser 2, Soul Blazer, 7th Saga, Illusion of Gaia...oh Illusion of Gaia how I loved you....these games were fantastic and truly set the SNES apart from the Genesis. 

Now add in the Nintendo-made classics.  Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Earthbound, F-Zero, Kirby, Punch-Out, Tetris, Yoshi...all the various entries in these iconic franchises.

Mix in some of the best in their respective series titles and the definitive editions of games like Super R-Type, Super Castlevania IV, Contra III, Super Ghouls & Ghosts, Earthworm Jim and three Super Star Wars titles. 

All that and you have the best system of the 16-bit era.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 27, 2016, 01:32:05 pm
It's funny that people always mention the SNES JRPGs, but back in the day I never even knew those games existed, because I never knew anyone who played them. I only first heard of many of them when I got back into classic games. Square Soft and Enix games as I've come to know them, don't wow me a whole lot, so that's probably why I see the SNES and Genesis at a more level playing field.

Wow...I can see how that would definitely affect your perception of the SNES.  Chrono Trigger alone left a huge impression on me.  I still remember those old commercials where at the end, the Japanese guy said "CHRONO TRIGGER!"  ActRaiser was a game I bought day-n-date with my SNES purchase.  Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Final Fantasy II & III (V and VI in Japan), Secret of Evermore, Super Mario RPG, ActRaiser 2, Soul Blazer, 7th Saga, Illusion of Gaia...oh Illusion of Gaia how I loved you....these games were fantastic and truly set the SNES apart from the Genesis. 

Now add in the Nintendo-made classics.  Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Earthbound, F-Zero, Kirby, Punch-Out, Tetris, Yoshi...all the various entries in these iconic franchises.

Mix in some of the best in their respective series titles and the definitive editions of games like Super R-Type, Super Castlevania IV, Contra III, Super Ghouls & Ghosts, Earthworm Jim and three Super Star Wars titles. 

All that and you have the best system of the 16-bit era.

You actually enjoyed The 7th Saga? I never thought I would see the day that someone found something fun with that game.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 27, 2016, 01:38:45 pm
You actually enjoyed The 7th Saga? I never thought I would see the day that someone found something fun with that game.

I can be a bit of a masochist sometimes. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kamikazekeeg on January 27, 2016, 02:48:48 pm
I agree on the SNES being better...But Sonic isn't fun anymore...whhhaaa??

Not really.  I remember liking it alot before, but going back, it's such trial and error and the speed doesn't really let you see what is going on, so you get lots of cheap hits, and as a platformer, it's just alright.  I still like Sonic, but it became something I can't really go back to play much of.  There are other Genesis games like that too, like I played Vectorman at a game store and man is that basically not fun Mega Man lol.  Very much prefer playing something like Sonic Generations since it improves on the old style and the best of the 3D style.

Few SNES games make me feel the same.  Can't really think of any that I can't go back to play and enjoy anymore.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 27, 2016, 03:39:57 pm
Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 27, 2016, 03:49:11 pm
Few SNES games make me feel the same.  Can't really think of any that I can't go back to play and enjoy anymore.

This pretty much sums it up for me.  Whenever I pop in Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection, not a single game holds my interest for more than a few minutes any longer.  In that respect, sworddude was right.  Genesis games have a distinctively more "arcade-feel" than most SNES games.  They are meant to play in short bursts and thus, are far more forgettable. 

On the other hand, putting a SNES game in and starting it up, you feel like you are ready and in for the long haul.  I never turned on Super Metroid or Zelda or Donkey Kong Country with the expectation that I would be playing it for a few minutes.  Even in the SNES's time with limited system abilities and stories, the games drew me in.  And I wanted to stay in that fantastic world. 

If I think really hard, I can recall some of the music or moments from a handful of Genesis games.  Green Hill Zone from Sonic is the most memorable to me.  Or "Wise fwom yo gwave!" in the intro to Altered Beast.  On the other hand, the music of Zelda, Mario, Metroid and Final Fantasy among others is ingrained into my mind.  The music from Brinstar in Super Metroid still gives me goosebumps.  The Zelda theme is one of the most iconic pieces of music.  Who hasn't heard the Super Mario Bros. music?  The beautiful opening music for Final Fantasy.  The victory tune in Final Fantasy. 

The SNES controller.  What a fantastic controller.  One of the very first that I felt comfortable playing for hours on end.  Unlike Genesis shoehorning all the buttons on the front or worse-starting off with a three button clunker that you had to hit the start button to switch between kicks & punches in fighting games, the SNES pad introduced shoulder buttons.  Six face buttons work well for fighters, but suck for just about everything else. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 27, 2016, 04:20:48 pm
Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P

I just quit posting since all people talk about is the sonic games and the crappy games sega makes nowadays.

Sonic games on the sega are fun but they are not the games I come for when playing sega.

I also find it hard to compare sonic to mario since the difference is to big. Sonic games are pretty mediocre while mario games are really great games. You cannot compare sonic to mario games even though sonic is a mascot.

Same goes for comparing mario to crash bandicoot. Mario games are just way better.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kamikazekeeg on January 27, 2016, 04:36:04 pm
Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P

I just quit posting since all people talk about is the sonic games and the crappy games sega makes nowadays.

Sonic games on the sega are fun but they are not the games I come for when playing sega.

I also find it hard to compare sonic to mario since the difference is to big. Sonic games are pretty mediocre while mario games are really great games. You cannot compare sonic to mario games even though sonic is a mascot.

Same goes for comparing mario to crash bandicoot. Mario games are just way better.

Sure, but they are obvious comparisons to make since they were meant to be direct competitors and important enough to discuss when we are having talk of SNES vs Genesis.  Especially so when a quick look at the Genesis shows that apparently of the top 10 Genesis games sold, Sonic takes up 4 slots of that.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 27, 2016, 04:54:54 pm
You actually enjoyed The 7th Saga? I never thought I would see the day that someone found something fun with that game.

I can be a bit of a masochist sometimes.

I can tell. If you had Lux in your party, then most of the time the game was manageable. Otherwise, things were just insanely difficult. I remember starting the game with Wilme and getting decimated after the first town. I was like, "This is nothing like Breath of Fire!!"

Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P

Oh, I know you weren't trolling. ^^
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: turf on January 27, 2016, 05:00:20 pm
I agree on the SNES being better...But Sonic isn't fun anymore...whhhaaa??

Sonic isn't fun. 
Genesis had a few good games, but the SNES had 10x the number of good games. 

Just to gauge popularity, how many Genesis games are over $75?  Now, how many SNES games are over $75?  There's a good indicator of staying power.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 27, 2016, 05:00:31 pm
Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P

I just quit posting since all people talk about is the sonic games and the crappy games sega makes nowadays.

Sonic games on the sega are fun but they are not the games I come for when playing sega.

I also find it hard to compare sonic to mario since the difference is to big. Sonic games are pretty mediocre while mario games are really great games. You cannot compare sonic to mario games even though sonic is a mascot.

Same goes for comparing mario to crash bandicoot. Mario games are just way better.

Sure, but they are obvious comparisons to make since they were meant to be direct competitors and important enough to discuss when we are having talk of SNES vs Genesis.  Especially so when a quick look at the Genesis shows that apparently of the top 10 Genesis games sold, Sonic takes up 4 slots of that.

Very true however this thread is about genesis vs snes wich is the better system not about sales etc.

Best selling videogames are not always the best games a system has to offer.

I don't see chrono trigger in the top 10 snes sales wich is one of the best snes games, I also doubt that many people had or even heard about those games back in the day.

There is a reason why it is so expensive wich is expected thanks to the limited sales even though the game is excellent.

Would say the same thing about super metroid wich had better sales.



Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 27, 2016, 05:09:00 pm
Everyone has heard of Chrono Trigger, whether it was back when it was first released on the SNES or nowadays. If not, then they're not gamers.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kamikazekeeg on January 27, 2016, 05:12:14 pm
Wow. You're a class act, aren't you?

I think he blew a gasket and quit posting.  I really wasn't angry whatsoever.  I was sitting here at work, bored and typing replies.  Some people just take these things too seriously.   :P

I just quit posting since all people talk about is the sonic games and the crappy games sega makes nowadays.

Sonic games on the sega are fun but they are not the games I come for when playing sega.

I also find it hard to compare sonic to mario since the difference is to big. Sonic games are pretty mediocre while mario games are really great games. You cannot compare sonic to mario games even though sonic is a mascot.

Same goes for comparing mario to crash bandicoot. Mario games are just way better.

Sure, but they are obvious comparisons to make since they were meant to be direct competitors and important enough to discuss when we are having talk of SNES vs Genesis.  Especially so when a quick look at the Genesis shows that apparently of the top 10 Genesis games sold, Sonic takes up 4 slots of that.

Very true however this thread is about genesis vs snes wich is the better system not about sales etc.

Best selling videogames are not always the best games a system has to offer.

I don't see chrono trigger in the top 10 snes sales wich is one of the best snes games, I also doubt that many people had or even heard about those games back in the day.

There is a reason why they it is so expensive wich is expected thanks to the limited sales even though the game is excellent.

Would say the same thing about super metroid wich had better sales.

It didn't sell as big in North America, but in Japan, it sold millions and was the third biggest selling game of 1995.  Kinda surprised it did under a million here in the USA, which does explain its cost.

But I wasn't really using the sales of Sonic to say anything about which was better, just that in comparison, Sonic pretty much has to be brought up in a versus between the two systems simply because it was marketed as a direct competitor to Mario and very clearly was some of the biggest draw the system had when all off Sonics major releases featured prominently in sales.  Not having Sonic speaking of the Genesis is like not having Mario when speaking of the SNES lol

Everyone has heard of Chrono Trigger, whether it was back when it was first released on the SNES or nowadays. If not, then they're not gamers.

Nowadays sure, but I just did a quick look and while it was critically well received, it didn't sell a lot on the SNES here.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 27, 2016, 05:18:21 pm
Right on. But, what I'm saying is that when it was first released, it was the latest "big thing" to get. I didn't get it when it was first released because of the price.

That, or I was fortunate enough to live in a place where everyone had CT on the brain.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kamikazekeeg on January 27, 2016, 05:26:00 pm
Right on. But, what I'm saying is that when it was first released, it was the latest "big thing" to get. I didn't get it when it was first released because of the price.

That, or I was fortunate enough to live in a place where everyone had CT on the brain.

Maybe where you were living, but according to wiki, it didn't even make close to a half million in sales, which is fairly low, especially when you compare it to Japan, which sold over 2 million copies.  Of that year, Donkey Kong Country 2 sold over 2 million copies in North America in comparison.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 27, 2016, 05:33:57 pm
It is possible. It is hard, if not impossible, to find out when Nintendo and SEGA were aware of government interest in video game violence. From what I understand from many accounts, Nintendo and SEGA were both tipped off about the future hearings from a toy industry contact with a decent heads up before everything got started. I suspect this is 1993 (well into a year after the scopes were introduced)

Key Dates
Super Scope - February 92
SEGA Video Game Rating - June 93 (first sign that SEGA knew something. Would be implemented quickly.)
Congressional hearing - Dec 9 1993
Release of Doom - Dec 10 1993 (I love this date. One day after the hearing)

My suspicion is that the bazooka is just the next step from the light gun design and followed the current trend in the arcades the year before. It is the "super" version. You also had a move in the arcades to bigger guns such as the T2 arcade game in 91. In the early 90s bazookas and machine guns were cool in America. And light guns were marketed toward Americans. You also saw a return to traditional guns in consoles in the mid 90s when arcades mimicked those with point blank, virtue cop, etc.. I imagine it just followed the arcades.

I could buy into this analysis. By the way I love your Sega Ages videos on YouTube.

Thanks for the kind words.

Also, just to be clear and provide credit, I can totally buy into your earlier analysis as well. It's tough to know for sure. After all, if Nintendo/SEGA are trying to market something carefully, they aren't going to be bringing attention to it until they have to. We also saw a change in the NES zapper earlier...
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 27, 2016, 05:35:00 pm
Now add in the Nintendo-made classics.  Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Earthbound, F-Zero, Kirby, Punch-Out, Tetris, Yoshi...all the various entries in these iconic franchises.

Pretty much this is what SNES was for me, and Faceball 2000. lol

Quote
Mix in some of the best in their respective series titles and the definitive editions of games like Super R-Type, Super Castlevania IV, Contra III, Super Ghouls & Ghosts, Earthworm Jim and three Super Star Wars titles. 

All that and you have the best system of the 16-bit era.

You've got to credit the Genesis though for having many highly regarded shoot-em-ups. That system has soooo many shoot-em-ups. Ironically, my favorite one from back in the day is Gradius III (which was an SNES game). ;D

It seems by SNES, Nintendo had cemented an audience for their franchises, Sega kinda failed to do that with Master System, I believe in part thanks to Nintendo's shady monopoly on the industry. With Genesis's success I think Sega was attempting to establish some solid IPs, but wasn't able to grab the attention away from those anticipating the next Mario or Zelda. A lot of first party Sega games on Genesis (aside from Sonic) were almost ignored in comparison to Nintendo. I don't know, I guess Genesis was assumed to be the sports game system, that didn't have anything like what Nintendo had, but that really wasn't true. Aside from RPGs, well it did have RPGs, but never gained much traction with them. The most notable being Phantasy Star (Sega's Final Fantasy) and Beyond Oasis (Sega's Legend of Zelda).


Just to gauge popularity, how many Genesis games are over $75?  Now, how many SNES games are over $75?  There's a good indicator of staying power.

I don't think that's a good way to gauge popularity of the game itself. How many obscure NA soccer games on SNES are over $100? Either soccer games are the bees knees on SNES, or Nintendo collector's be crazy. I think they be out of their mind, personally. A lot of people collect just to collect on the system.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 27, 2016, 05:56:51 pm
Everyone has heard of Chrono Trigger, whether it was back when it was first released on the SNES or nowadays. If not, then they're not gamers.

I first heard of Chrono Trigger when it came out on the DS, lol. Probably the only RPG on SNES I knew about back in the day was SMRPG and I had no idea what to make of that game. Back then, the only way we knew about games was by going to the store or the rental place and looking at the covers and the screen shots. Didn't have Nintendo Power, or anything like that. We rented SMRPG once thinking it would be like other Mario games.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 27, 2016, 08:38:16 pm
^ Must not have read gaming magazines back then. I remember Chrono Trigger being really hyped in the magazines. Full multi-page articles dedicated to it. Double-page spread ads for it. Always bragging about all these special new graphics techniques that would be getting used for the first time ever.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 28, 2016, 10:18:23 am
^ Must not have read gaming magazines back then. I remember Chrono Trigger being really hyped in the magazines. Full multi-page articles dedicated to it. Double-page spread ads for it. Always bragging about all these special new graphics techniques that would be getting used for the first time ever.

That must be it; not everyone probably read game magazines back in those days. Chrono Trigger was everywhere in all of the magazines I read. Then, a friend of mine got it and showed it to a bunch of us.

And the rest, as they say, is history.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 28, 2016, 10:55:00 am
^ Must not have read gaming magazines back then. I remember Chrono Trigger being really hyped in the magazines. Full multi-page articles dedicated to it. Double-page spread ads for it. Always bragging about all these special new graphics techniques that would be getting used for the first time ever.

That must be it; not everyone probably read game magazines back in those days. Chrono Trigger was everywhere in all of the magazines I read. Then, a friend of mine got it and showed it to a bunch of us.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

I remember the adds in old EGM issues as well as various comic books I collected back then.  Not to mention the commercials I...previously mentioned. 

Sega might have done what "Nintendont", but I think most of that was coughing up the dust that Nintendo kicked up in their faces.   ;D :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 28, 2016, 11:58:26 am
^ Must not have read gaming magazines back then. I remember Chrono Trigger being really hyped in the magazines. Full multi-page articles dedicated to it. Double-page spread ads for it. Always bragging about all these special new graphics techniques that would be getting used for the first time ever.

That must be it; not everyone probably read game magazines back in those days. Chrono Trigger was everywhere in all of the magazines I read. Then, a friend of mine got it and showed it to a bunch of us.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

I remember the adds in old EGM issues as well as various comic books I collected back then.  Not to mention the commercials I...previously mentioned. 

Sega might have done what "Nintendont", but I think most of that was coughing up the dust that Nintendo kicked up in their faces.   ;D :P

While I'm on the SNES side of this debate, Genesis was actually kicking up dust in Nintendo's face for a long time during the 16-bit wars. Sega was a longtime sales leader in the U.S. during the early 90s.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 28, 2016, 01:04:47 pm
While I'm on the SNES side of this debate, Genesis was actually kicking up dust in Nintendo's face for a long time during the 16-bit wars. Sega was a longtime sales leader in the U.S. during the early 90s.

Actually, you are quite correct.  But in the end, the two systems sold around 80 million total with Genesis at 30.75 million and SNES at 49.10 million. 

Sega did a fantastic job marketing the Genesis in the early days and as much as some people don't like it, Sega propped Sonic up against Mario which is why those two franchises are always compared when discussing the 16-bit consoles. 

In the end, Sega's biggest adversary wasn't Nintendo or Sony.  It was themselves.  They began unraveling when they released the Sega CD and followed it up with disaster after disaster.  Namely, the 32X and Saturn.  By this point, nothing they could do would keep the Dreamcast alive.

Funny anecdote:  Sega's total hardware sales for Master System, Genesis, Saturn and Dreamcast was under 64 million.  Nintendo's first system the NES alone sold nearly as much with 61.9 million and the first PlayStation sold over 102 million. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 28, 2016, 01:58:00 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 28, 2016, 02:22:32 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 28, 2016, 02:29:42 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 28, 2016, 03:31:13 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 28, 2016, 04:59:09 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.

I wouldn't disagree with that. It's just that in 1995 it was the wrong console to be releasing. 2d games were falling out of favor.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 28, 2016, 05:09:21 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.

I wouldn't disagree with that. It's just that in 1995 it was the wrong console to be releasing. 2d games were falling out of favor.

Very true games like tomb raider on the saturn look pretty bad.

Yet if we look at an example of the wii, new super mario bros wii out sold the combined two super mario galaxy titles. The mario galaxy games an awesome 3d series yet outsold by a same formula 2d mario bros game wich had some few differences compared to the ds title. I enjoyed mario galaxy way more than new super mario bros wii.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 28, 2016, 05:55:39 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.

I wouldn't disagree with that. It's just that in 1995 it was the wrong console to be releasing. 2d games were falling out of favor.

I agree to an extent and disagree to an extent. I believe well over 95% of the 3D games from that generation sucked. From a good game perspective sticking to 2D was not a bad move. From a marketing perspective it was the wrong move. People were eating up crappy 3D games back then.

In short, I hold the unpopular opinion that in 1995 everyone should have still been releasing 2D consoles for the most part. The tech was barely there for 3D. The programming knowledge certainly wasn't. Doom was just 2 years earlier... Most programmers were not well versed with 3D enough until approximately 1998 for the most part. The main exceptions to this come from Nintendo. Even early games such as Mario 64 were decent in 3D. However, this is in large part to Miyamoto insisting on programming a character that is fun to control before really tackling the game.

I personally find it really hard to go back to 3D games of this era. The Saturn gets some play (although not a lot) from me because it was a 2D games machine. The PSOne is one of my least favorite consoles. I also am not a huge RPG fan, so take that into consideration with my opinion of the system.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: scarface88fg on January 28, 2016, 07:09:26 pm
I know this is pretty much the Ford vs. Chevy or 9mm vs. 45 ACP of the video game world, but I can't really say which is better since I haven't had much experience with either system.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 28, 2016, 09:15:37 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.

I wouldn't disagree with that. It's just that in 1995 it was the wrong console to be releasing. 2d games were falling out of favor.

I agree to an extent and disagree to an extent. I believe well over 95% of the 3D games from that generation sucked. From a good game perspective sticking to 2D was not a bad move. From a marketing perspective it was the wrong move. People were eating up crappy 3D games back then.

In short, I hold the unpopular opinion that in 1995 everyone should have still been releasing 2D consoles for the most part. The tech was barely there for 3D. The programming knowledge certainly wasn't. Doom was just 2 years earlier... Most programmers were not well versed with 3D enough until approximately 1998 for the most part. The main exceptions to this come from Nintendo. Even early games such as Mario 64 were decent in 3D. However, this is in large part to Miyamoto insisting on programming a character that is fun to control before really tackling the game.

I personally find it really hard to go back to 3D games of this era. The Saturn gets some play (although not a lot) from me because it was a 2D games machine. The PSOne is one of my least favorite consoles. I also am not a huge RPG fan, so take that into consideration with my opinion of the system.

I agree that those early 3D games are pretty rough to look at. But I'd programmers hadn't started on the path of 3D graphics then, where would games be now. Those first steps into 3D were rough, but I believe necessary for games to be what they are today. The saying "you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs" comes to mind.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 28, 2016, 09:37:09 pm
I always postulate that the Genesis is the reason why Nintendo decided to become the "alternative" game console following the SNES. Perhaps in part due to the ferocity of Sega's (seemingly) competent marketing, and their soured deal with Sony which was morphing into even more competition directed at them. I think this is why they opted to back out of the console race and make products that don't intend to directly compete with the industry leaders.

Sega on the other hand, IMO, had no idea what they were actually doing, no sense of the market, where it was heading or how to build products accordingly. As gf78 stated, they started to destroy themselves investing in the development of junky or misguided ideas that the market didn't want, or need. They kept burning consumers and retail with the cramming of bad ideas out onto the market in effort to call "first" around every corner. The Dreamcast too was a great and innovative system in theory, as cool as it is, was far from a perfect product in the end.

The idea to create a 32-bit add-on (32X) full well knowing and working on a dedicated 32-bit system (Saturn) at the same time is mind boggling.  Especially when you consider they never intended for the two to be cross-compatible.

They went full retard there, I'll admit. On top of that, they were developing the Saturn to be a beefed up Genesis. They didn't realize that 3D gaming was where the market would head, so they Frankenstein'd the architecture of the Saturn at the last minute. Then they botched the release of the Saturn to retail!


The sega saturn is one of the best 2d game system pretty much comparable to the neo geo aes/mvs with unfortunatly not to many games on it.

I wouldn't disagree with that. It's just that in 1995 it was the wrong console to be releasing. 2d games were falling out of favor.

I agree to an extent and disagree to an extent. I believe well over 95% of the 3D games from that generation sucked. From a good game perspective sticking to 2D was not a bad move. From a marketing perspective it was the wrong move. People were eating up crappy 3D games back then.

In short, I hold the unpopular opinion that in 1995 everyone should have still been releasing 2D consoles for the most part. The tech was barely there for 3D. The programming knowledge certainly wasn't. Doom was just 2 years earlier... Most programmers were not well versed with 3D enough until approximately 1998 for the most part. The main exceptions to this come from Nintendo. Even early games such as Mario 64 were decent in 3D. However, this is in large part to Miyamoto insisting on programming a character that is fun to control before really tackling the game.

I personally find it really hard to go back to 3D games of this era. The Saturn gets some play (although not a lot) from me because it was a 2D games machine. The PSOne is one of my least favorite consoles. I also am not a huge RPG fan, so take that into consideration with my opinion of the system.

I agree that those early 3D games are pretty rough to look at. But I'd programmers hadn't started on the path of 3D graphics then, where would games be now. Those first steps into 3D were rough, but I believe necessary for games to be what they are today. The saying "you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs" comes to mind.

Partially true. In any case, I would choose not to play their learning attempts.

The problem with creating an excuse is that many early 3D games were good. Doom, Mario 64, Zelda OoT. etc. Each of these games were labors of love and done exceedingly well. And its not just the fun factor. I actually don't find Mario 64 that fun. However, it is well-crafted. Moreover, many 3D games were good if they knew their limitations and created boundaries to prevent bad stuff happening. Crash Bandicoot essentially put you in a hallway. Resident Evil never moved the camera. Each of these were kludges to prevent the games from being disasters. Most did not have this restraint. Few didn't need the restraints (such as the Id and Nintendo examples).

No eggs needed to be broken. Most of the games were just awful. The fifth generation of consoles was very important for me. It was the generation where I started to distinguish what I didn't like or what failed in video game design.

Things seemed to be figured out mostly in the 6th gen. The 7th gen rocked.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sin2beta on January 28, 2016, 09:42:52 pm
Oh, also keep in mind I can't get on too high of a horse talking about game quality. After all, I enjoy the SG-1000.  ;D
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on January 29, 2016, 01:15:05 am
Oh, how I love the early 3D games, jagged polygons and all! They were just so simple, and that's why I like them so much. Part of what I dislike about modern games is that there's too much fluff for my taste, they're far too cinematic and surreal, and often over-complicating the formula of the gameplay. I can't wait for the renaissance of the early 3D game look and feel. It worked for Minecaft, why couldn't it be done with some other types of games?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 29, 2016, 09:58:42 am
Partially true. In any case, I would choose not to play their learning attempts.

The problem with creating an excuse is that many early 3D games were good. Doom, Mario 64, Zelda OoT. etc. Each of these games were labors of love and done exceedingly well. And its not just the fun factor. I actually don't find Mario 64 that fun. However, it is well-crafted. Moreover, many 3D games were good if they knew their limitations and created boundaries to prevent bad stuff happening. Crash Bandicoot essentially put you in a hallway. Resident Evil never moved the camera. Each of these were kludges to prevent the games from being disasters. Most did not have this restraint. Few didn't need the restraints (such as the Id and Nintendo examples).

No eggs needed to be broken. Most of the games were just awful. The fifth generation of consoles was very important for me. It was the generation where I started to distinguish what I didn't like or what failed in video game design.

Things seemed to be figured out mostly in the 6th gen. The 7th gen rocked.

While I agree that it's hard to go back and try to play those game because of how atrocious early 3D polygon titles look by today's standards, I would argue that they were extremely fun for their time and extremely important to the future of gaming. 

Doom actually wasn't a true 3D game.  From the Wiki:  "John Carmack had to make use of several tricks for these features to run smoothly on home computers of 1993. Most significantly, the Doom engine and levels are not truly three-dimensional; they are internally represented on a single plane, with height differences stored separately as displacements (a similar technique is still used in many games to create expansive outdoor environments). This allows a two point perspective projection, with several design limitations: for example, it is not possible in the Doom engine to create one room over another room in a level. However, thanks to its two-dimensional property, the environment can be rendered very quickly, using a binary space partitioning method. Another benefit was the clarity of the automap, as that could be rendered with 2D vectors without any risk of overlapping. Additionally, the BSP tree technology created by Bruce Naylor was used." 

While I agree that Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time are well made games, I didn't find them fun.  I did find Gran Turismo, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Dino Crisis and many others to be extremely fun and I have quite fond memories of them.  Again, they are hard to look at by today's standards, but they were extremely important and influenced the direction of games today.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 29, 2016, 10:42:15 am
Oh, how I love the early 3D games, jagged polygons and all!

I think there's a certain charm to this look. I think this style of games is what made the N64 so special. I recently finished Castlevania 64 and, yes it was ugly, but it was a charming kind of ugly.

I actually found it more fun than Mario 64 or OoT.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 29, 2016, 10:48:35 am
Oh, how I love the early 3D games, jagged polygons and all!

I think there's a certain charm to this look. I think this style of games is what made the N64 so special. I recently finished Castlevania 64 and, yes it was ugly, but it was a charming kind of ugly.

I actually found it more fun than Mario 64 or OoT.

I think we can agree on that.  Mario 64 and OoT sucked IMO.  Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie was the shiznit.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 29, 2016, 11:12:30 am
Oh, how I love the early 3D games, jagged polygons and all!

I think there's a certain charm to this look. I think this style of games is what made the N64 so special. I recently finished Castlevania 64 and, yes it was ugly, but it was a charming kind of ugly.

I actually found it more fun than Mario 64 or OoT.

I think we can agree on that.  Mario 64 and OoT sucked IMO.  Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie was the shiznit.

I don't think that is necesarrily the case.

My guess is that Oot and mario 64 are games that have been played way to many times. You would already know what to expect same formula etc etc It's to popular.

Mario 64 and zelda Ocarina of time are examples for other games these days while others are not wich is why games like banjo tooie etc give a new experience wich makes a game more fun to play even though the game is not better.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on January 29, 2016, 11:22:56 am
Or folks just didn't find them fun in the first place.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 29, 2016, 11:56:47 am
I don't think that is necesarrily the case.

My guess is that Oot and mario 64 are games that have been played way to many times. You would already know what to expect same formula etc etc It's to popular.

Mario 64 and zelda Ocarina of time are examples for other games these days while others are not wich is why games like banjo tooie etc give a new experience wich makes a game more fun to play even though the game is not better.

Eh...I pretty much hated Mario 64 and Ocarina from day one.  Even stood in line at midnight, making myself late for my 11:30 start time to snag a gold, chromium-boxed copy of OoT.  I'm not going to say what anyone should or shouldn't like, but I couldn't stand either of those games.  Listening to that Navi saying "Listen!  Listen!  Listen!" was absolutely maddening, to the point where I wanted to stab scissors through my ears so I wouldn't have to hear her annoying ass.  They even cut out the classic Zelda music and put some goofy shit in it's place.  So I couldn't even enjoy just running around the world cutting grass looking for Rupies. 

Mario 64 was a big empty, blurry shell of a world with an atrocious camera and repeating the same few levels over and over to find a freakin' star.  Yeah, it sucked to me and I probably only invested an hour tops into it's crappy world.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 29, 2016, 01:17:23 pm
I don't think that is necesarrily the case.

My guess is that Oot and mario 64 are games that have been played way to many times. You would already know what to expect same formula etc etc It's to popular.

Mario 64 and zelda Ocarina of time are examples for other games these days while others are not wich is why games like banjo tooie etc give a new experience wich makes a game more fun to play even though the game is not better.

Eh...I pretty much hated Mario 64 and Ocarina from day one.  Even stood in line at midnight, making myself late for my 11:30 start time to snag a gold, chromium-boxed copy of OoT.  I'm not going to say what anyone should or shouldn't like, but I couldn't stand either of those games.  Listening to that Navi saying "Listen!  Listen!  Listen!" was absolutely maddening, to the point where I wanted to stab scissors through my ears so I wouldn't have to hear her annoying ass.  They even cut out the classic Zelda music and put some goofy shit in it's place.  So I couldn't even enjoy just running around the world cutting grass looking for Rupies. 

Mario 64 was a big empty, blurry shell of a world with an atrocious camera and repeating the same few levels over and over to find a freakin' star.  Yeah, it sucked to me and I probably only invested an hour tops into it's crappy world.

Mario 64 is a hard game for many.

I had many friends (all even the ones who game quitte allot) who played that game and never finished it 100% and they quit playing while I easily beat it 100%

same goes for mario sunshine and the 2 mario galaxy titles.

There are allot of lvl's even though you had to repeat the lvl's in different ways to find multiple stars.

There was allot to do and plenty of variety in my opinion if you managed to get a certain amount of stars wich in some cases was pretty hard to some since only hard stars were left to unlock new doors.

same goes for zelda ocarina of time, I love the zelda 3d games more than the older 2d games.

I you find mario 64 and zelda oot bad I won't argue just can't imagine banjo kazooie etc being better games wich I also have played and own.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 29, 2016, 02:01:24 pm
Mario 64 is a hard game for many.

I had many friends (all even the ones who game quitte allot) who played that game and never finished it 100% and they quit playing while I easily beat it 100%

same goes for mario sunshine and the 2 mario galaxy titles.

There are allot of lvl's even though you had to repeat the lvl's in different ways to find multiple stars.

There was allot to do and plenty of variety in my opinion if you managed to get a certain amount of stars wich in some cases was pretty hard to some since only hard stars were left to unlock new doors.

same goes for zelda ocarina of time, I love the zelda 3d games more than the older 2d games.

I you find mario 64 and zelda oot bad I won't argue just can't imagine banjo kazooie etc being better games wich I also have played and own.

I think for me personally, the transition to 3D for classic 2D games just didn't work well.  Sonic, Mario and Zelda (even though it was quasi-3D, go-anywhere to begin with) didn't feel like Sonic, Mario and Zelda anymore.  Sonic and Mario in particular were games about precision jumping and timing.  With the clumsy transition to those early 3D games, I found myself constantly missing what/who I was trying to jump on and because of the lousy camera angles, takings hits running into enemies that the camera hadn't panned around fast enough for me to see. 

To this day, I don't play 3D Mario titles and I thought the Galaxy games were pretty blah as well.  Sunshine I had some fun with, mainly because the gameplay focus shifted from precision platforming to using the squirt pack to clean up the ink.  When Nintendo and Sega decided to make 2D entries in these franchises (New Super Mario Bros. and Sonic Anniversary respectively), I was all over it. 

Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie-even though they too were 3D platformers-was a new franchise with no previous entries to compare to.  They also had some fun gameplay mechanics such as Kazooie running fast with Banjo on his back , digging holes and using Kazooie to drift when you jump from a high area.  The game also had a special charm all it's own. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on January 29, 2016, 03:23:01 pm
But really back on topic, I think the main difference between SNES's longevity and viability over the Genesis is that most Genesis games are like phone games.  They are fun to play for a few minutes at a time, but not for any great length of time.  I just don't feel any urge to invest time into playing them.  Genesis is even worse off because it wasn't portable and the Nomad system ate through batteries like a fat man at a buffet. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 29, 2016, 04:21:52 pm
But really back on topic, I think the main difference between SNES's longevity and viability over the Genesis is that most Genesis games are like phone games.  They are fun to play for a few minutes at a time, but not for any great length of time.  I just don't feel any urge to invest time into playing them.  Genesis is even worse off because it wasn't portable and the Nomad system ate through batteries like a fat man at a buffet.

I agree with you on that for the sonic games. I disagree with other titles though.

However I do understand your point of view since you play the sega games on sega collections on for example the ps3 etc and not having the whole console with carts. Having a collection of allot of games on one disc after dying a few times makes it really easy to switch games. It also make it feel allot cheaper even though it being the same games.

Also for fun being able to play for a few minutes. It almost sounds like after you die a few times you quit playing.

Well sega games are usually way more challenging than snes games with some exceptions. There comes allot of learn and repeat seeing the same thing to play before you can go on if that's where you are going with a few minutes worth of playtime.

Haven't seen any snes collections, such collections make a system feel cheap and sega did that quitte allot if nintendo did the same thing you would kinda feel the same. Nintendo ofcourse releases all those games seperately for purchase.










Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: maximo310 on January 29, 2016, 04:43:52 pm
But really back on topic, I think the main difference between SNES's longevity and viability over the Genesis is that most Genesis games are like phone games.  They are fun to play for a few minutes at a time, but not for any great length of time.  I just don't feel any urge to invest time into playing them.  Genesis is even worse off because it wasn't portable and the Nomad system ate through batteries like a fat man at a buffet.

I agree with you on that for the sonic games. I disagree with other titles though.

However I do understand your point of view since you play the sega games on sega collections on for example the ps3 etc and not having the whole console with carts. Having a collection of allot of games on one disc after dying a few times makes it really easy to switch games. It also make it feel allot cheaper even though it being the same games.

Also for fun being able to play for a few minutes. It almost sounds like after you die a few times you quit playing.

Well sega games are usually way more challenging than snes games with some exceptions. There comes allot of learn and repeat seeing the same thing to play before you can go on if that's where you are going with a few minutes worth of playtime.

Haven't seen any snes collections, such collections make a system feel cheap and sega did that quitte allot if nintendo did the same thing you would kinda feel the same. Nintendo ofcourse releases all those games seperately for purchase.
The Sonic Genesis Collection on PS3 is only $10-20 for about 50 games including a few arcade perfect ports, so its a good starting point if you're unsure about spending money of genesis stuff. Maybe the games on the collection didn't grab his interest; everyone has different tastes. There are certain genesis games that I wouldn't pick up either if there was a better version was playable elsewhere, like Truxton.
Nintendo isn't one to do collections; the closest I've seen to that are the Kirby Dream Collection, most of the time they rather do remakes for money.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on January 29, 2016, 07:01:44 pm
The Sonic Genesis Collection on PS3 is only $10-20 for about 50 games including a few arcade perfect ports, so its a good starting point if you're unsure about spending money of genesis stuff. Maybe the games on the collection didn't grab his interest; everyone has different tastes. There are certain genesis games that I wouldn't pick up either if there was a better version was playable elsewhere, like Truxton.
Nintendo isn't one to do collections; the closest I've seen to that are the Kirby Dream Collection, most of the time they rather do remakes for money.

If someone doesn't find anything to hold their interest in Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection on PS3 then Genesis is really not their deal.

Golden Axe Warrior for Master System. Golden Axe 3 (previously unreleased I think). Kid Chameleon. EVERY SINGLE PHANTASY STAR game. (including the first one from the Master System) and I'm sorry but Comix Zone was a really unique and ambitious (for it's time) take on the beat em up genre.

With the exception of sports there is at least one game from every genre on it.

Not putting anyone down. Just stating the obvious. Genesis really isn't their deal.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: blinkcopter on January 30, 2016, 10:48:10 am
I vote SNES. Can't beat nostalgia.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on January 30, 2016, 10:59:56 am
The Sonic Genesis Collection on PS3 is only $10-20 for about 50 games including a few arcade perfect ports, so its a good starting point if you're unsure about spending money of genesis stuff. Maybe the games on the collection didn't grab his interest; everyone has different tastes. There are certain genesis games that I wouldn't pick up either if there was a better version was playable elsewhere, like Truxton.
Nintendo isn't one to do collections; the closest I've seen to that are the Kirby Dream Collection, most of the time they rather do remakes for money.

If someone doesn't find anything to hold their interest in Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection on PS3 then Genesis is really not their deal.

Golden Axe Warrior for Master System. Golden Axe 3 (previously unreleased I think). Kid Chameleon. EVERY SINGLE PHANTASY STAR game. (including the first one from the Master System) and I'm sorry but Comix Zone was a really unique and ambitious (for it's time) take on the beat em up genre.

With the exception of sports there is at least one game from every genre on it.

Not putting anyone down. Just stating the obvious. Genesis really isn't their deal.

I'd be quite surprised if a retro-gamer could not find one game they enjoyed on that collection. Like has been said: There's something for every genre represented there, except sports. And good representations in every genre. Even if you don't like the average arcade-releases from Sega, there's plenty of stuff like Phantasy Star, Sonic, and Comix Zone that are aimed directly at the console gamer on that collection.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on January 30, 2016, 11:09:16 am
The Sonic Genesis Collection on PS3 is only $10-20 for about 50 games including a few arcade perfect ports, so its a good starting point if you're unsure about spending money of genesis stuff. Maybe the games on the collection didn't grab his interest; everyone has different tastes. There are certain genesis games that I wouldn't pick up either if there was a better version was playable elsewhere, like Truxton.
Nintendo isn't one to do collections; the closest I've seen to that are the Kirby Dream Collection, most of the time they rather do remakes for money.

If someone doesn't find anything to hold their interest in Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection on PS3 then Genesis is really not their deal.

Golden Axe Warrior for Master System. Golden Axe 3 (previously unreleased I think). Kid Chameleon. EVERY SINGLE PHANTASY STAR game. (including the first one from the Master System) and I'm sorry but Comix Zone was a really unique and ambitious (for it's time) take on the beat em up genre.

With the exception of sports there is at least one game from every genre on it.

Not putting anyone down. Just stating the obvious. Genesis really isn't their deal.

I'd be quite surprised if a retro-gamer could not find one game they enjoyed on that collection. Like has been said: There's something for every genre represented there, except sports. And good representations in every genre. Even if you don't like the average arcade-releases from Sega, there's plenty of stuff like Phantasy Star, Sonic, and Comix Zone that are aimed directly at the console gamer on that collection.

I fully agree with you on that, If you don't like any of those games It's hard to believe one likes retro games.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 02, 2016, 10:38:10 am
I'd be quite surprised if a retro-gamer could not find one game they enjoyed on that collection. Like has been said: There's something for every genre represented there, except sports. And good representations in every genre. Even if you don't like the average arcade-releases from Sega, there's plenty of stuff like Phantasy Star, Sonic, and Comix Zone that are aimed directly at the console gamer on that collection.

I enjoyed many of those games back in the Genesis' heyday.  They just haven't held up IMO.  They are no longer fun, whereas many SNES games are still a lot of fun to play.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 02, 2016, 10:40:28 am
I fully agree with you on that, If you don't like any of those games It's hard to believe one likes retro games.

None of the Genesis games really have any staying power.  They were fun in their time, but have become antiques that haven't aged as well as their SNES counterparts.  I've tried playing the Phantasy Star games again and they are just meh.  It's all down to personal preference, but while I feel that way about Genesis games, I'm still more than happy to play old SNES games.  Chrono Trigger is still top-notch to this day as are the old Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy games.  Mario and Zelda (even though I'm not a huge Zelda fan these days) are timeless.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 02, 2016, 11:06:57 am
I fully agree with you on that, If you don't like any of those games It's hard to believe one likes retro games.

Different tastes are funny like that, aren't they?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 02, 2016, 11:24:09 am
I fully agree with you on that, If you don't like any of those games It's hard to believe one likes retro games.

Different tastes are funny like that, aren't they?

Earthworm Jim is a game I feel the same way about, regardless of it being on both Genesis and SNES.  At the time of it's release, it's humor was funny.  I laughed at the sound effects, launching a cow, pulling my worm body out of my suit to use as a whip, etc.  It was funny.  When I went back to play it again in the last couple of years, I didn't find the humor in it.  The gameplay mechanics didn't age well.  It felt like an old game that I just didn't have any fond memories of, even though I found it fun to play during it's prime. 

Basically, some games age more gracefully than others, same as movies, wines, etc.  Back in the 80's, I loved watching Van Damme, Stallone and Schwarzenegger flicks.  Those old action movies.  Today, I can't stand Jean Claude and Stallone is take it or leave it for me for the most part.  Schwarzenegger movies though?  They have sort of morphed in my eyes into semi-comedy.  The over-the-top action of the 80's makes me laugh now.  But I enjoy the movies just the same. 

That's Genesis vs SNES.  Genesis games are as cringeworthy as watching Van Damme do the splits to a slow motion groin punch, while SNES games are still fun like Schwarzenegger.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: olly88 on February 02, 2016, 10:41:05 pm
SNES for me by a long way. I got my Mega Drive before my SNES, so I have loads of nostalgia for it, and I absolutely adore Sonic 1 and 2. But, going back to it now, so many times the games that I'm trying for the first time just feel really underwhelming, whereas the SNES still manages to impress me time after time.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 03, 2016, 08:57:43 am
On a related note, I was browsing N4G.com last night and came across a "retro review" for Illusion of Gaia for the SNES.  By far, it was one of my favorite SNES games.  It's funny, because while cleaning out ancient paperwork and receipts from my filing cabinet, I came across the original Walmart receipt for it.  Back in 1993, I paid $80 plus tax for this game!   :o  But you know what, it was totally worth it.  Transforming into Freedan and Shadow was awesome, though you didn't get Shadow until very late in the game if I remember correctly.  Hey...23 years ago is a long time, especially when you are as old and senile as this guy!   :P

To this day, this game stands out among all the 16-bit generation games that I owned & played as one of my favorites alongside another Enix game, ActRaiser.  The developer Quintet was fantastic!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 03, 2016, 10:08:00 am
On a related note, I was browsing N4G.com last night and came across a "retro review" for Illusion of Gaia for the SNES.  By far, it was one of my favorite SNES games.  It's funny, because while cleaning out ancient paperwork and receipts from my filing cabinet, I came across the original Walmart receipt for it.  Back in 1993, I paid $80 plus tax for this game!   :o  But you know what, it was totally worth it.  Transforming into Freedan and Shadow was awesome, though you didn't get Shadow until very late in the game if I remember correctly.  Hey...23 years ago is a long time, especially when you are as old and senile as this guy!   :P

To this day, this game stands out among all the 16-bit generation games that I owned & played as one of my favorites alongside another Enix game, ActRaiser.  The developer Quintet was fantastic!

Illusion of Gaia was fun. I didn't like how Nintendo censored so much of the stuff in our version, but that's because Nintendo is Nintendo. Did you play Terranigma? Never getting a US release of that game was such a travesty. >_<
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 03, 2016, 10:51:15 am
Illusion of Gaia was fun. I didn't like how Nintendo censored so much of the stuff in our version, but that's because Nintendo is Nintendo. Did you play Terranigma? Never getting a US release of that game was such a travesty. >_<

Playing Illusion of Gaia at the time it was out, I didn't know what was censored so I didn't miss it.  In the years since, I haven't followed much about it but that seems par for the course with Nintendo.  Everything was censored or just altered for no apparent reason.  Look at the horrific box art for games like Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy compared to their beautiful Japanese counterparts. 

I never played Terranigma, but it looks fantastic.  I might have to download it to give it a try.  We missed so much here like the original Star Ocean, Front Mission, the Romancing SaGa games, several Final Fantasy titles (until they were released on PlayStation) and Bahamut Lagoon.  Such a shame.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: thecrypticodor on February 04, 2016, 02:24:40 am
It's absolutely apparent that the Genesis can't hold a candle with the ridiculous amount of JRPG's on the SNES. But if I were on a desert Island and could choose only one JRPG between both systems I'd choose Shining Force 2 in a heartbeat before any on the SNES.

I don't know why all the hate the Genesis is getting there's tons of fantastic games available for it.

Rocket Knight Adventures
Shining Force 1&2
Phantasy Star Series
Streets of Rage series
Gunstar Heroes
TMT The Hyperstone Heist
Contra Hard Corps
Mega Bomber Man
Castle and World of Illusion
Castlevania Bloodlines
Thunder Force III and IV (Lightening Force)
Comix Zone
Ghouls “N Ghost
Herzog Zwei
Shiniobi III
Ranger X
Dynamite Headdy

I really could go on

I actually like that most Nintendo devotes don't appreciate the Genny. It's nice to be able to still buy the majority of it's titles for under $30. :)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 04, 2016, 08:57:05 am
It's absolutely apparent that the Genesis can't hold a candle with the ridiculous amount of JRPG's on the SNES. But if I were on a desert Island and could choose only one JRPG between both systems I'd choose Shining Force 2 in a heartbeat before any on the SNES.

I don't know why all the hate the Genesis is getting there's tons of fantastic games available for it.

I actually like that most Nintendo devotes don't appreciate the Genny. It's nice to be able to still buy the majority of it's titles for under $30. :)

I'm far from a Nintendo devotee, but having owned both systems simultaneously in their prime, then returning and playing them today - the Genesis and it's games just don't hold up to the SNES and it's library. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: turf on February 04, 2016, 10:16:39 am
It's absolutely apparent that the Genesis can't hold a candle with the ridiculous amount of JRPG's on the SNES. But if I were on a desert Island and could choose only one JRPG between both systems I'd choose Shining Force 2 in a heartbeat before any on the SNES.

I don't know why all the hate the Genesis is getting there's tons of fantastic games available for it.

Rocket Knight Adventures
Shining Force 1&2
Phantasy Star Series
Streets of Rage series
Gunstar Heroes
TMT The Hyperstone Heist
Contra Hard Corps
Mega Bomber Man
Castle and World of Illusion
Castlevania Bloodlines
Thunder Force III and IV (Lightening Force)
Comix Zone
Ghouls “N Ghost
Herzog Zwei
Shiniobi III
Ranger X
Dynamite Headdy

I really could go on

I actually like that most Nintendo devotes don't appreciate the Genny. It's nice to be able to still buy the majority of it's titles for under $30. :)

It's not hate for the Genesis.  There are some really good games (Just not Sonic).    The Genesis is good.  I have several games for it.  It just doesn't have as many great games as the SNES. 

That's a damn fine list you made there.     :D
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: shfan on February 04, 2016, 07:07:50 pm
As with a similar topic, I don't pretend to know which is 'better', only which I prefer, and I've got to say it's the Megadrive. A massive amount of the SNES' landmark titles never made it over here to Europe, hell we didn't even get SMRPG, let alone FF IV/VI, Chrono Trigger or Earthbound. We got Lagoon though..

Streets of Rage 2, to me, runs rings around any beat 'em ups on the Megadrive, SNES or anything comparable, it's something I play regularly to this day. Soleil (Crusader of Centy) and Wonderboy in Monster World are both easy to beat and short, but offer some of the slickest, most genuinely fun gaming I've experienced.

That's not to say the SNES doesn't have a place in my heart or is in any way something I don't care about, Zelda III and SMW are two of my favourite games, but the MD's catalogue had a lot more interest for me. The graphics and sound of the MD wasn't a negative thing in my opinion, like a lot of its catalogue it reminds me a lot of slightly earlier games, which is no bad thing.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: dashv on February 05, 2016, 01:26:30 am
As with a similar topic, I don't pretend to know which is 'better', only which I prefer, and I've got to say it's the Megadrive. A massive amount of the SNES' landmark titles never made it over here to Europe, hell we didn't even get SMRPG, let alone FF IV/VI, Chrono Trigger or Earthbound. We got Lagoon though..

Streets of Rage 2, to me, runs rings around any beat 'em ups on the Megadrive, SNES or anything comparable, it's something I play regularly to this day. Soleil (Crusader of Centy) and Wonderboy in Monster World are both easy to beat and short, but offer some of the slickest, most genuinely fun gaming I've experienced.

That's not to say the SNES doesn't have a place in my heart or is in any way something I don't care about, Zelda III and SMW are two of my favourite games, but the MD's catalogue had a lot more interest for me. The graphics and sound of the MD wasn't a negative thing in my opinion, like a lot of its catalogue it reminds me a lot of slightly earlier games, which is no bad thing.

I have to agree with your Streets of Rage 2 comment.

I love me some Double Dragon. But honestly Streets of Rage 2 is the definitive side scrolling beat em up for me.

I know a lot of people like Final Fight. But that always felt to me like I was controlling a piece of lumber.

Streets of Rage (2 and 3 especially) had great controls and fluid game play.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 05, 2016, 06:56:14 am
As with a similar topic, I don't pretend to know which is 'better', only which I prefer, and I've got to say it's the Megadrive. A massive amount of the SNES' landmark titles never made it over here to Europe, hell we didn't even get SMRPG, let alone FF IV/VI, Chrono Trigger or Earthbound. We got Lagoon though..

Streets of Rage 2, to me, runs rings around any beat 'em ups on the Megadrive, SNES or anything comparable, it's something I play regularly to this day. Soleil (Crusader of Centy) and Wonderboy in Monster World are both easy to beat and short, but offer some of the slickest, most genuinely fun gaming I've experienced.

That's not to say the SNES doesn't have a place in my heart or is in any way something I don't care about, Zelda III and SMW are two of my favourite games, but the MD's catalogue had a lot more interest for me. The graphics and sound of the MD wasn't a negative thing in my opinion, like a lot of its catalogue it reminds me a lot of slightly earlier games, which is no bad thing.

I have to agree with your Streets of Rage 2 comment.

I love me some Double Dragon. But honestly Streets of Rage 2 is the definitive side scrolling beat em up for me.

I know a lot of people like Final Fight. But that always felt to me like I was controlling a piece of lumber.

Streets of Rage (2 and 3 especially) had great controls and fluid game play.

Final fight had some issues but is still a nice series to collect and play for.

Streets of rage 3 has terrible music, I have that game. Does make sence why it is more uncommon because It's a copy of streets of rage 2 with worse music.

Streets of rage vs final fight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo5wUyxBM8Q

Streets of rage 2 vs final fight 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNi-2bKOo6M

Streets of rage 3 vs final fight 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkqVt7aS_AA

Castlevania blood lines vs Super castlevania IV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaozEmSDvLA

Contra hard corps vs contra III alien wars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn0jH4Q92AY

Nintendo's mario might be way better than sega's sonic but I do not come to this system for games like sonic. I come for some real retro games. There are plenty more examples. Sonic games are really mediocre except for the casino night lvl and super sonic wich is awesome. Other than that sonic games are mediocre. With all respect for people who like Sonic games. I just don't like the sonic games that much.

I do not care that games like for example street fighter are by a tiny margin better on the snes since the sounds are slightly better while grapics are on par and music is better on sega. Wonder why? I could play an arcade perfect port of street fighter II on a ps1 upwards consoles that's why. However these games stay exactly the same in the nintedo e shop etc since these are not arcade ports but console excusive games, but games like street fighter are downgraded arcade ports. There is no reason to play street fighter II on a console when having an arcade perfect port on any of the newer console. Like the snes controller more than a ps1 or ps2  ps3 etc controller? Get an arcade stick it's not that hard.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: ComanderSheppard on February 05, 2016, 07:28:28 am
Doesn't Genesis do what Nintendont?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 09:42:28 am
Doesn't Genesis do what Nintendont?

Yep.  Flickering sprites, music that sounds like it's in a tin can and ultimately forgettable titles that didn't stand the test of time. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 05, 2016, 10:10:10 am
Doesn't Genesis do what Nintendont?

Yep.  Flickering sprites, music that sounds like it's in a tin can and ultimately forgettable titles that didn't stand the test of time.

Keep telling yourself that even though such important games as contra and castlevania on the sega are better than on nintendo.

Wich are console exclusive games and not downgraded arcade ports.

It's a pretty hard hit take but It's fact there are plenty more examples, to me such games are way more fun to play than games such as mario and or sonic games on the snes or sega.

Also there is a reason why the final fight games are so expensive these days. The console ports weren't that good and had plenty of faults as a result them games didn't sell well and the games became expensive.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 05, 2016, 10:27:51 am
^^^^^

Hmm...can someone please translate?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 10:57:27 am
Keep telling yourself that even though such important games as contra and castlevania on the sega are better than on nintendo.

Wich are console exclusive games and not downgraded arcade ports.

It's a pretty hard hit take but It's fact there are plenty more examples, to me such games are way more fun to play than games such as mario and or sonic games on the snes or sega.

Also there is a reason why the final fight games are so expensive these days. The console ports weren't that good and had plenty of faults as a result them games didn't sell well and the games became expensive.

I'll tell you:  I like Super Castlevania IV and Dracula X better than Bloodlines.  They look better, they play better and I like them better.  Contra III on the SNES is better than Contra on the Genesis.  None of those SNES games are downgraded ports from the arcade.  They are console exclusive. 

Your entire argument is based around preference, and that's fine because this thread is asking who likes what better.  But come on, trying to downplay Mario like that series is irrelevant just makes you look desperate.

Arcade ports on the Genesis were generally no better nor worse than the SNES.  But the overwhelming majority here has shown they choose the SNES over the Genesis. 

Dude, just enjoy your bargain-bin system and games.  It's ok and there is nothing wrong with it.  Me, I forgot the Genesis and it's half-baked library of "not-as-good-as-SNES" games like a fart in the wind.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 05, 2016, 11:47:17 am
Keep telling yourself that even though such important games as contra and castlevania on the sega are better than on nintendo.

Wich are console exclusive games and not downgraded arcade ports.

It's a pretty hard hit take but It's fact there are plenty more examples, to me such games are way more fun to play than games such as mario and or sonic games on the snes or sega.

Also there is a reason why the final fight games are so expensive these days. The console ports weren't that good and had plenty of faults as a result them games didn't sell well and the games became expensive.

I'll tell you:  I like Super Castlevania IV and Dracula X better than Bloodlines.  They look better, they play better and I like them better.  Contra III on the SNES is better than Contra on the Genesis.  None of those SNES games are downgraded ports from the arcade.  They are console exclusive. 

Your entire argument is based around preference, and that's fine because this thread is asking who likes what better.  But come on, trying to downplay Mario like that series is irrelevant just makes you look desperate.

Arcade ports on the Genesis were generally no better nor worse than the SNES.  But the overwhelming majority here has shown they choose the SNES over the Genesis. 

Dude, just enjoy your bargain-bin system and games.  It's ok and there is nothing wrong with it.  Me, I forgot the Genesis and it's half-baked library of "not-as-good-as-SNES" games like a fart in the wind.

First of all with downgraded arcade ports I mean game such as street fighter and mortal kombat.

Also about the mario games Desperate? I have to say that I played the 2d mario games to much so I prefer to play something else these days the 3d mario games are the way to go. Yoshi's island is nice still. Didn't downgrade 2d mario titles they are nice but not the best in my opinion also in my honest opinion I do prefer allot of other snes titles instead of playing mario world.

Also in many castlevania top 10 lists castlevania bloodlines stands higher than super castlevania IV. Castlevania dracula X is way worse than castlevania IV so we cannot take that game into consideration of being better than bloodlines. I do however also enjoy super castlevania IV and super contra since both are still excellent games some of the best of the snes system.

Also have you looked at the prices for for example the castlevania game?

Super castlevania IV cart only or cib is worth way less than a castlevania bloodlines even as a lose cart the sega game wins in value. If an equally uncommon game is better people pay more for it and sega has such games.

However people only talk about the mediocre games wich go for indeed pretty much nothing. You can say what you want but also I do not like trash games I only collect good games sega has indeed some trash but so does the snes. I do not collect filler titles it's not that easy to find sega deals but it is easier than for snes (but only thanks to the cardboard boxes since I am a cib collector) If only for lose carts it is pretty easy. If you want to find them good sega games It's gonna cost you.

Also for cib collectors snes might be expensive but for lose carts It's pretty much on par for them good games except for rare games however both systems have them rare titles wich are worth in the thousands. For sega I can name a few but I cannot name some for snes wich are worth over 1000 non sealed.

Contra III has horrible grapics with the top down view wich is 50% of the game and way less gameplay same goes for castlevania IV in only the gameplay department. These are the kinda games that matter to me.

Super castlevania IV vs castlevania bloodlines

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaozEmSDvLA

Contra III vs contra hard corps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn0jH4Q92AY

Also I cannot take your opinion to seriously. You do not seem to have to much knowledge on both consoles while I currently own both and actually play them games. I also enjoy both systems. You play them on game collections for a few minutes and had them consoles back in the day. You do not seem to know at all what you are talking about aside of giving some trash talk without a reason of why it is so bad.


It's really fun and all that you owned both consoles back in the day but to be fair most people with a snes had a copy of mario world and some random games. For sega the same thing sonic and some random games. Have other people to prove this most people only had a few games.

I really cannot take your answers to seriously so after saying this I will ignore your further BS reactions and say this topic goodbey.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 12:11:21 pm
Sworddude...I imagine you sitting there, reading my replies and gritting your teeth as you furiously hammer away at your keyboard to justify your reasoning for why you prefer the Genesis.  It's ok.

You are basically arguing with yourself.  Fine.  You like Castlevania Bloodlines and Contra for Genesis better.  You don't need to justify it to me or convince me they are better.  I'm perfectly happy for you that you like them. 

You bring up the fact that a copy of Bloodlines costs more than a copy of Super Castlevania IV, but consistently talk about how expensive SNES games are compared to Genesis games you got for "bargain cheap" prices.  What point are you trying to make?  Less people owned a Genesis than a SNES and less copies of Bloodlines was printed.  Look how much a copy of Dracula X for the SNES costs and then get back to me on "value" as you perceive it.  You talk about the value of uncommon games and guess what:  that's universal.  It's called "supply & demand. 

You try to criticize my knowledge of video games and act like I only play a few minutes of the games before making a judgement.  That is categorically false.  I played the crap out of games for both systems when they were the systems currently on the market.  You just can't get it through that thick skull that Genesis games in general for me have not stood the test of time.  They are no longer fun.  I don't enjoy them.  Whereas I still love many SNES games.  They are still fun.  They still retain that spark or "special sauce" that made them so charming in the first place.  So let me end this by saying:

SNES outsold Genesis worldwide
SNES games outsold Genesis games worldwide
SNES had better hardware
SNES had better games
SNES was a better value
SNES systems and games sell for significantly more on average than Genesis games
More people like the SNES than the Genesis

If you can't stand the heat - in this case, the fact that Genesis couldn't hold the SNES's jock - then get out of the proverbial kitchen.  Or, trade your entire Genesis collection in for a SNES and two games.  It's about equal value money-wise. 

Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on February 05, 2016, 12:38:19 pm
Do you really think we don't own these consoles, Sword? You realize that nearly all of us regulars here are retro gamers, right?
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 05, 2016, 12:44:36 pm
Do you really think we don't own these consoles, Sword? You realize that nearly all of us regulars here are retro gamers, right?

I'm only talking about the person above you who does not have the consoles anymore.

Not about anyone else just this guy
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: thecrypticodor on February 05, 2016, 12:46:27 pm

SNES systems and games sell for significantly more on average than Genesis games
 

That doesn't really mean anything just about everything Nintendo related generally goes for more on average than most other games and consoles. The Saturn's library is generally more expensive than the SNES's, does that mean the quality of it's titles are better?

I'll admit the SNES is all around the better system, but trashing the Genesis just comes off as fanboyism.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 05, 2016, 12:52:20 pm
Do you really think we don't own these consoles, Sword? You realize that nearly all of us regulars here are retro gamers, right?

I'm only talking about the person above you who does not have the consoles anymore.

Not about anyone else just this guy

I don't see how not owning the consoles anymore would make someone's opinion on it invalid, especially if they have plenty of experience with it.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: turf on February 05, 2016, 01:15:09 pm
CHILDREN!  STOP! 
This type of fanboy-ism doesn't do anything but piss people off.  Sure, some folks like the Genesis better.  Some like the SNES better. 
Opinions are like assholes.  Everyone has one.   This isn't a 4th grade playground.  Drop the heat. 

This forum is a place for folks to talk like adults.  I'm not saying that we have to hold hands and sing Kum Ba Yah, but this argument makes both of you look silly.  This is 2016.  It's possible to for someone to think differently than you.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 01:42:55 pm
Do you really think we don't own these consoles, Sword? You realize that nearly all of us regulars here are retro gamers, right?

I'm only talking about the person above you who does not have the consoles anymore.

Not about anyone else just this guy

Regardless of whether I own the console(s) any longer is irrelevant.  I still have access to the games whether through emulation or compilation discs.  The fact that I owned these consoles and games but don't any longer doesn't mean my opinions of them are any less valid.  I'm not talking about something I have zero experience with.  I've been gaming since the Atari 2600 hit the scene and I was a wee lad.  I haven't played them in years, but should I have no opinion on the 2600 and it's games because I don't game on it now?

You keep circling back and keep the topic going because you just cannot accept the fact of my opinions on the Genesis and it's library of games.  Again, I feel that most Genesis software was forgettable while a large portion of the SNES library are timeless classics.  It's like movies, music or anything else.  Some films stand the test of time, some don't.  For every Star Wars, there is a Red Planet.  For every Exorcist, there is a Leprechaun in da Hood.  That's my comparison of the SNES and Genesis library.  Get over it. 

For me, the majority of Genesis games are utterly forgettable.  The games I remember fondly are Disney's Aladdin, Castle of Illusion starring Mickey Mouse, Taz-Mania and the original Mortal Kombat. 

For the SNES, the games I remember fondly are Super Mario World, Super Mario All-Stars, Donkey Kong Country 1-3, Killer Instinct, Legend of Zelda - A Link to the Past, Illusion of Gaia, Super Castlevania IV, ActRaiser, Demon's Crest, Super Metroid, Yoshi's Island, Final Fantasy II, III and Mystic Quest, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire I & II, Super R-Type, Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts, Ninja Gaiden Trilogy, Secret of Evermore, Super Mario Kart and Super Mario RPG.

There were other games that I enjoyed in their prime on both systems, but these games above are the games that to this day I still would play.  And as you can clearly see, the Genesis comes up with the short end of the stick. 

This thread is about personal preference and you can't stand that people have an opinion different than yours.  And for some reason, you keep trying to argue with me and convince others that my opinions shouldn't count because I don't own a Genesis any longer.  And what I have done in response is to troll you.  Quite successfully I might add. 

You have tried to use every excuse under the sun why Genesis is better.  First you basically say that SNES is expensive because retards are out buying it up and you are glad because you got the bulk of your Genesis library "dirt cheap."  Then you try to say sales don't matter, but turn around and try to use current market values for a couple of Genesis games to justify that they are better than SNES games.  You say these Genesis games are expensive because they are rare or had low print runs.  But this runs in direct contradiction to your thoughts on the SNES's high prices when the bulk of the expensive titles for the SNES sold millions of copies. 

You keep arguing that the Genesis Contra and Castlevania games are "gooder" than the SNES alternatives and sound like a little kid in grade school saying "Well my daddy has a bigger house than your daddy."  You come off extremely childish.  I'm happy for you that you love Streets of Rage.  Great.  It very well might be better than the Final Fight games on the SNES.  I don't know.  You know why?  Because I grew tired of side-scrolling "beat-em ups" long ago and they are a dime a dozen.  It's not my favorite genre of games and probably falls close to the bottom for me.  Walking sideways, beating up the same person with a color palate swap and getting a pipe that breaks after cracking two skulls is dumb.  I just think it's dumb.  I can pick up any number of titles that are exactly the same.  At least the beat-em-up Maximum Carnage had superheroes and a cool, colored cartridge. 

So keep on arguing your point in circles sworddude and I'll keep trolling you.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 01:44:44 pm

SNES systems and games sell for significantly more on average than Genesis games
 

That doesn't really mean anything just about everything Nintendo related generally goes for more on average than most other games and consoles. The Saturn's library is generally more expensive than the SNES's, does that mean the quality of it's titles are better?

I'll admit the SNES is all around the better system, but trashing the Genesis just comes off as fanboyism.

I'm fine with people liking the Genesis.  It's not like I hate it or anything.  But I get tired of this guy's constand "mine is gooder!" comments directed at me.  The thread topic is SNES vs Genesis.  Sworddude doesn't like my opinion and keeps trying to bait me.  I'm just letting him have his fun and getting digs in at the end.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 05, 2016, 01:51:29 pm
CHILDREN!  STOP! 
This type of fanboy-ism doesn't do anything but piss people off.  Sure, some folks like the Genesis better.  Some like the SNES better. 
Opinions are like assholes.  Everyone has one.   This isn't a 4th grade playground.  Drop the heat. 

This forum is a place for folks to talk like adults.  I'm not saying that we have to hold hands and sing Kum Ba Yah, but this argument makes both of you look silly.  This is 2016.  It's possible to for someone to think differently than you.

Sorry turf...I've just been enjoying toying with my stalker.   :-[
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 05, 2016, 02:33:56 pm
CHILDREN!  STOP! 
This type of fanboy-ism doesn't do anything but piss people off.  Sure, some folks like the Genesis better.  Some like the SNES better. 
Opinions are like assholes.  Everyone has one.   This isn't a 4th grade playground.  Drop the heat. 

This forum is a place for folks to talk like adults.  I'm not saying that we have to hold hands and sing Kum Ba Yah, but this argument makes both of you look silly.  This is 2016.  It's possible to for someone to think differently than you.

Sorry turf...I've just been enjoying toying with my stalker.   :-[

Who's stalking who.

I guess I am the guy who is setting up the bait since you respond to all my replies, even the ones wich were not directed to you and were just from the topic. You responded to them even though no quote of your post, I wasn't even talking to you nothing in the text pretty neutral and yet you responded with your endless BS discussions.

Even now with my last comment with nothing in the text at all

Your the stalker and if you reply to this message than that is prove.

Also note that I only responded to you replies because you trash talk allot, not to convince someone to prefer sega.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: Warmsignal on February 05, 2016, 03:00:09 pm
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/8955/snes-and-sega-genesis/image.jpg)
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: olly88 on February 05, 2016, 03:49:55 pm
Damn, things got hot in here.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: baseycillings on February 05, 2016, 06:20:26 pm
BLAST PROCESSING
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 06, 2016, 03:34:34 pm
BLAST PROCESSING

Enough about my weekend.

HEY-O!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 06, 2016, 03:59:25 pm
BLAST PROCESSING

Enough about my weekend.

HEY-O!

Lol!  Already?  The weekend just started!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: kashell on February 07, 2016, 11:43:05 am
BLAST PROCESSING

Enough about my weekend.

HEY-O!

I like to get an early start.

Lol!  Already?  The weekend just started!
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: telly on February 07, 2016, 11:45:55 am
BLAST PROCESSING

Enough about my weekend.

HEY-O!

*Insert foghorn  ;D
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: courtlyhades296 on February 10, 2016, 08:11:16 pm
Even though I'm a huge SNES fan, I enjoyed many games on Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection. Beyond Oasis was great, but inferior to Zelda Link to the Past and especially Terranigma. The Golden Axe and Streets of Rage games blew away any SNES Beat-em-up. Phantasy Star IV was good, but nowhere near as good as Final Fantasy VI or Chrono Trigger. The Sonic games are awesome, but Super Mario World is slightly better.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: turf on February 10, 2016, 09:49:55 pm
The Golden Axe and Streets of Rage games blew away any SNES Beat-em-up.

Them's fightin words. 
Batman Returns?  Turtles in Time?  SNES wins in my book. 
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: courtlyhades296 on February 11, 2016, 05:45:23 pm
The Golden Axe and Streets of Rage games blew away any SNES Beat-em-up.

Them's fightin words. 
Batman Returns?  Turtles in Time?  SNES wins in my book.

Even though Beat-em-ups, Shumps and Sports are better on Genesis, SNES is still better overall. RPGs are my favorite genre, and that's why i prefer the US SNES over the US Genesis. Even in Europe, where most RPGs weren't released, SNES wins due to Nintendo properly optimizing games they published for the different TV standard, whereas SEGA didn't even attempt to do that.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on February 11, 2016, 07:24:37 pm
^ Is that the general opinion over there, too? Because I thought Sega was king over there.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: courtlyhades296 on February 11, 2016, 08:48:20 pm
^ Is that the general opinion over there, too? Because I thought Sega was king over there.
Yes, outside the UK it's the general opinion. In the UK, SEGA Mega Drive is still more loved than the SNES.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 11, 2016, 08:57:27 pm
Genesis was a lot of fun. I had good times with it, but I don't feel the same any longer. The SNES and its big games are timeless. That's why you can get almost the entire Genesis Sega-made titles catalog on a single disc on nearly every platform for under $20. But people willingly fork over $5 or more a pop for virtual console SNES ports and many times over original MSRP for complete in box games.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: atrumlupus on February 12, 2016, 12:49:38 am
Looking back the SNES seemed to age better, but there was a lot going on in the Genesis era. A lot of people forget that Phantasy Star, Shining Force, and Warsong/Langrisser, all made their homes on the Genesis. The mutliplats were almost always better on the SNES, but exclusives tended to be on par between the Genesis and SNES. Each had their strong series even if they aren't as well known now.

Sega just sucks with marketing nowdays and let its great stable of series go to shit.

There was also MUSHA, Thunder Force and a lot of other great shumps that got a US release only on the Genesis. Also via converter granted but the genesis was one of the first consoles to offer backwards compatibility for the Sega Master System.

But all that aside. At the end of the Day the SNES games and system just held up better and are less painful to look at on a modern TV while most of Genesis greats lay forgotten, I guess in that sense after all these years the SNES won the 16 bit wars. War doesn't determine who is right..only who is left after all.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 12, 2016, 09:03:20 am
Looking back the SNES seemed to age better, but there was a lot going on in the Genesis era. A lot of people forget that Phantasy Star, Shining Force, and Warsong/Langrisser, all made their homes on the Genesis. The mutliplats were almost always better on the SNES, but exclusives tended to be on par between the Genesis and SNES. Each had their strong series even if they aren't as well known now.

Sega just sucks with marketing nowdays and let its great stable of series go to shit.

There was also MUSHA, Thunder Force and a lot of other great shumps that got a US release only on the Genesis. Also via converter granted but the genesis was one of the first consoles to offer backwards compatibility for the Sega Master System.

But all that aside. At the end of the Day the SNES games and system just held up better and are less painful to look at on a modern TV while most of Genesis greats lay forgotten, I guess in that sense after all these years the SNES won the 16 bit wars. War doesn't determine who is right..only who is left after all.

I think it goes beyond marketing that is Sega's problem.  They dissolved, integrated, trashed, etc. all of their development teams.  There was a time when Sega teams like AM2, WOW, Hitmaker, SmileBit and Overworks made some great software.  They shut all of that down.  The only shining spot in Sega's developer stable is Atlus which they acquired and to a lesser extent-the Creative Assembly who made Alien:  Isolation. 

Phantasy Star, Shining Force and other Sega-made RPG series were very good and in the 16-bit wars, fans who owned a Genesis had a good time with these games.  But if you surveyed gamers then and now, how many do you think would know what Phantasy Star or Shining Force was compared to those who would know what Dragon Warrior or Final Fantasy was?

Even though some people here think that Sonic wasn't important and indeed-may have not been important to them at all personally-the Sonic games were what allowed Sega to compete with Nintendo so well.  Sonic was and still is Sega's "mascot" character and I guarantee the reason that many Genesis owners bought the console to begin with.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: sworddude on February 12, 2016, 12:25:50 pm
It is pretty logical that the sonic games are the reason that sega could compete with nintendo however I could say the same thing with nintendo.

What would become of the snes or nintendo overall without mario.

Still though on the lesser known titles the snes did better with marketing.

It is pretty logical that more people knew dragon warrior and final fantasy than shining force or phantasy star look at the results so many dragon quest and final fantasy games thanks to the big fanbase. If it was vice versa we would have seen more phantasy star and shining force games instead of the other way around. During that time not many people knew of these titles.

Hack even nowadays I'm pretty sure that allot of people don't know phantasy star or shining force.

The better titles on sega were marketed pretty bad not to many people know of them back than while nintendo did a decent job with their lesser known good titles.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on February 12, 2016, 01:10:19 pm
It was Sega themselves that were the problem. Sega of Japan and Sega of America often butted heads and worked against each other, when they were supposed to be on the same team. The 32X is a big of example of this. Sega of Japan wanted nothing to do with it because they knew the Saturn was coming. But Sega of America decided they were going to put it out anyways. And we all know what a big flop that turned out to be and how much money Sega wasted on it.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: gf78 on February 12, 2016, 01:17:29 pm
It was Sega themselves that were the problem. Sega of Japan and Sega of America often butted heads and worked against each other, when they were supposed to be on the same team. The 32X is a big of example of this. Sega of Japan wanted nothing to do with it because they knew the Saturn was coming. But Sega of America decided they were going to put it out anyways. And we all know what a big flop that turned out to be and how much money Sega wasted on it.

Funny enough, I just this week came into possession of my first 32X game - Star Wars Arcade!   :P
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: atrumlupus on February 12, 2016, 11:20:11 pm
And don't forget in the Saturn Era, Hurp a durp, let's not release any JRPGs or 2D games because Western gamers don't ever want that. And we saw how that turned out. It didn't.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on February 13, 2016, 12:38:31 am
^ I think you might mean the N64?  ???
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: maximo310 on February 13, 2016, 01:37:20 am
It's mostly the 2D games of Gen 5 that weren't released in most markets. In the Saturn's case, I think there was stuff like Grandia and Shining Force III Scenario 2+3, and Dragon Force II that never saw a Western release because Sega didn't think there was any demand for those types of games.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: burningdoom on February 13, 2016, 02:29:06 am
Yes, there were a lot of Japanese only releases on Saturn. But there was still JRPGs and plenty of 2D games that did see release on the Saturn in the west. It wasn't devoid of those games.
Title: Re: SNES vs Genesis
Post by: HarvestDude on February 16, 2016, 12:25:35 am
For a long time i´ve considered the SNES superior because its best games are some of my favorite.

But i didn´t have contact with the Sega Genesis back then, when i was a late teen. (Even though i had a Sega Master System before any Nintendo systems).

A little late in life i got in real touch with Genesis and it started to grow on me. So i started to notice that the SNES and GENESIS were very different hardwares but both their games were exploited to the maximum their hardware could handle (and beyond, with those SNES special chips and Genesis´ 32x and Sega Cd). And i think that´s what it makes a console reach true greatness.

So, my answer to SNES vs. Genesis? No VERSUS. Snes AND Genesis. I love them both. The is no SNES without GENESIS for me.  ;D

HarvestDude™