Author Topic: SNES vs Genesis  (Read 29316 times)

dashv

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #60 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....



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.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2016, 04:13:32 am by dashv »

sworddude

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #61 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....



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.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2016, 05:24:44 am by sworddude »
Your Stylish Sword Master!



telly

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #62 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  :)
« Last Edit: January 26, 2016, 09:35:15 am by telly »
Currently Playing:
Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes (PS4), Resident Evil 5 (PS4), Pokémon: Ultra Moon (3DS), SSX3 (PS2)

My music collection | My Backloggery

DreamsDied13101

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #63 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.
The Day That Dreams Died 01/31/01


sworddude

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #64 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.
Your Stylish Sword Master!



DreamsDied13101

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #65 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.
The Day That Dreams Died 01/31/01


dashv

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #66 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.

gf78

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #67 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. 
Currently playing:  Last of Us Part II Remastered, Cyberpunk 2077 Ultimate Edition
Currently listening to:  Iron Maiden & Ghost
Currently Watching:  Cyberpunk Edgerunners & Last of Us

gf78

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #68 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.
Currently playing:  Last of Us Part II Remastered, Cyberpunk 2077 Ultimate Edition
Currently listening to:  Iron Maiden & Ghost
Currently Watching:  Cyberpunk Edgerunners & Last of Us

burningdoom

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #69 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.

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #70 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.


burningdoom

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #71 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.

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #72 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.


gf78

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #73 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. 
Currently playing:  Last of Us Part II Remastered, Cyberpunk 2077 Ultimate Edition
Currently listening to:  Iron Maiden & Ghost
Currently Watching:  Cyberpunk Edgerunners & Last of Us

burningdoom

PRO Supporter

Re: SNES vs Genesis
« Reply #74 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.