Another snes vs mega video before the movie. At least they say mega sold 40 mil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Qjimbo

I would definitely like to see a video similar to James Rolfe's but less biased. The resolution thing I could just about excuse as an easy mistake, but to ignore the SEGA six button controllers (which I did see other people own during the console's lifespan), and allow that dreadful 3rd party NES adaptor in was kind of stupid. The thing is I don't think he realised he was doing it, it's very hard to be truely objective without unintentionally "sticking up" for your personal favourite system.



I remember everyone talking about the Dreamcast broadband adaptor when it came out, that was a massive deal. I would argue it's the reason the Gamecube and PS2 got equivalent adaptors.

---

Yeah, James' video was pretty good, apart from the resolution, controller, and backwards compatibility parts. There were probably some other issues, but it was mostly a good video. There is also a comparison video by someone on youtube that goes by "Review Tech USA" or something like that. That one is a little bit more fair than James Rofle's video, but still isn't perfect.

Perhaps someday, someone will make the SNES vs. Genesis video to end all SNES vs, Genesis videos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

I know, and I know Steve from RVG Fanatic is cool too, but really, it seems like you run into those kinds of D-bags on the SNES front 98% of the time. At the same time, that last bit in my post is because I get what the internet is. Might seem like the opposite, going by the 'net, but when you stop and think about it, who would really believe D&D, or anything remotely derived from it(like Final Fantasy), was more popular than the NFL? Most Youtubers even self recognize as nerds.

---

..i am a genesis NHL 94 guy myself...i agree with most of your points...

Quote:

---

Yeah, and I'm sure it didn't need to be too fast to download 2-16 kilobytes of game data, but at the same time, Sega were the ones that established overall internet connectivity on a home console, so it's kind of a bigger deal that they had something established as early as '90. Especially when people seem to be trying to make the comparison with X-Band and Satellaview.

---

..again i agree...imo the sega channel was the best thing before the dreamcast actual current online...but i am kind of confused of your point, that was addressed in the video...sega channel, meganet, etc..i had sega sega channel in 1995 and loved it dude..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ComradeOj

Yeah, James' video was pretty good, apart from the resolution, controller, and backwards compatibility parts. There were probably some other issues, but it was mostly a good video. There is also a comparison video by someone on youtube that goes by "Review Tech USA" or something like that. That one is a little bit more fair than James Rofle's video, but still isn't perfect.

Perhaps someday, someone will make the SNES vs. Genesis video to end all SNES vs, Genesis videos.

---

That reviewtech guy is generally decent, but he's more of an opinion personality than hard facts kind of guy. He's got a few good videos out there, but mostly because he isn't blindly devoted (or against) anything in particular. But I really wouldn't look to him for a full fact vs fact break down on the 16 bit consoles.

And I agree with Qjimbo, I'm sure a lot of these guys thought they were giving the Genesis a fair shake... and to be fair, for THEM, they probably were.
But they couldn't be bothered to put in the extra effort to make sure their facts were correct, and they couldn't help but gush over the SNES games they loved and grew up with.
In the end the Genesis gets a few things for it that were "Big" in the 90's... Sonic, MK with blood!, and maybe a handful of other things here and there... but that's it.
Even the faster CPU tends to get swept under the rug. Or they will talk about Starfox and FX chip games like there was nothing assisting them, but will fail to mention the SVP (even if Sega never really turned it into a real competitor for the numerous enhancement chips for the SNES).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dennab

but i am kind of confused of your point, that was addressed in the video...sega channel, meganet, etc..i had sega sega channel in 1995 and loved it dude..

---

That's what I was getting at. It was the only thing brought up that was an actual point of influence.

All I can think of for the SNES side, and they didn't have enough brain power to bring it up, was the shoulder buttons.

Genesis:
*Meganet: Internet in 1990, with downloadable games, and online banking.
*Bringing western development back to forefront, after the NES kind of kicked it to the curb, in bringing Japanese development in mass force.
*Adult content/forming their own rating system that became ESRB. Would the SNES have had anything gory at the end, or would GTA reach home consoles otherwise?
*The release date. Sonic 2's Day. You now know which Tuesday the game you're anticipating is released on because of this. Before, a game was out when it was out.
*Animation. I don't think the Genesis get's enough credit for this. When did you ever see the level on animation brought about by this generation before the Genesis? What 2D cartridge game has reached, let alone surpassed, Aladdin?
*Getting the UK(apparently 70% of the European market) into home consoles, from microcomputers. Any Europeans with some input on this one? Some European countries were Nintendo territory, like France & Germany, were any other non-UK's more Genesis?
*Of course the biggest, which should cement the Genesis' place as one of the most important consoles of all time: Ripping the market share from Nintendo, and opening up the competitive market. I can't imagine a reality in which Sony, let alone Microsoft, would have been able to get their foot in the door, if Nintendo crushed Sega early on, and continued their market dominance.

I'm probably still forgetting some Genesis influences at that. Games wise:
Herzog Zwei: Created the RTS genre. Not that it hadn't been attempted before, but HZ was the first game developed on a machine with a fast enough processor for things to happen in real time, which effectively makes it the first. The codifier is Dune 2, which was ported to the Genesis, as Dune: The Battle for Arrakis, anyway. Either way, the beginnings of the genre happen on the Genesis.
Sonic: To this day, I haven't seen much Mario influence in platformer character design, and physics, for the most part, since Sonic became a thing.
Streets of Rage: Ironically, by the end, Final Fight 3 was borrowing from Streets of Rage 3.
First home console version of John Madden Football. 'nuff said.

Again, probably some others I'm forgetting. The Genesis is one of, if not the most, influential consoles of all time. That shouldn't even have been a remotely realistic argument to even think about having.

I think a lot of people doing videos like that mistake "most influential" for "one they remember the most fondly".

The Genesis/Megadrive did a lot of things for both hardware and games, that would be picked up/emulated for years to come. The SNES had quite a few as well. (Shoulder buttons, the metroidvania formula, kart racers).

Looking back you can certainly see that Sega was, in general, much more ahead of the times than Nintendo.
Disk based games, online services with downloadable games, big sports series entries, bundled internet connectivity, and of course a trend towards games that focused on the older side of the age scale.

But thinking back to those systems... most won't think of it that way. They are going to think back to their personal experiences. And those with little experience on the Genesis, but a lot on the SNES are going to think back on Super Metroid, ALttP, Mario Kart, Super Mario World, etc. Even on games which were on both, they are going to give the nod to the SNES version.

It's just the past seen through Nintendo tinted glasses. They are coming into the Genesis late to the party... or not even coming to it at all, it's rarely going to get a fair shake.

Honestly, I didn't even want to bring up the Genesis games, but the prick suggested all it had was Sonic, and nothing that was influential. I gotta question a lot of those SNES game influences.

Metroidvania's pretty much go back to Pitfall 2 on the 2600, let alone something like Super Pitfall and the original Metroid on the NES. Super Metroid influenced the map system and health restoring/game saving checkpoints of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. Where that games RPG elements come from is another guess. Any other metoidvania is either really obscure(but you'll know about it because: internet[hello Shantae]), or an indie project. Hell, none of the Metroid games ever moved Nintendo consoles. Super sold to about 2% of all SNES owners. Not denying the influence on the Castlevania series, but the impact is hardly felt anywhere else, and I'm not sure the Castlevania series pulled through better for it, especially since it alienated Japanese Castlevania fans.

Kart Racers: The 4th generation saw Streets Racers on both consoles, and an unreleased beta for Wacky Races on the Genesis. That was it. The Super Famicom exclusive racers are basically every other type, but. Again, I can't deny the influence itself, but the genre as a whole hardly feels like it exploded into a new exciting field for gamers.

F-Zero: ...outside of Wipeout, what else is there?

A Link to the Past: Influenced the way Ocarina of Time tells a story? The graphics of Crusader of Centy/Soleil(sure as hell wasn't the gameplay, other than being a top down view action/adventure)? Honestly, the original LoZ, and Ocarina are way more influential, and even at that, the action/adventure genre(or more to the point, as that's hard to define, "Zelda clones") was never all that ubiquitous. Probably for fear of not being able to deliver the same quality of the LoZ series, in the minds/hearts of that series fans.

Final Fantasy III/Chrono Trigger: ...not seeing it. Most of the JRPG's that stayed in Japan borrowed more from the Dragon Quest series. If anything feels like the Final Fantasy series, it doesn't feel like a specific game, let alone one specifically from the SNES series. Only SquareSoft ever used the ATB system, or anything like it. As good as Chrono Trigger was, it didn't influence shit. Not even it's own sequel had the same gameplay mechanics.

Street Fighter II: Yeah, he actually tried to go there... Like Double Dragon and Final Fight, this was all arcade, with anticipation for home consoles. Not the other way around. The arcade scene made the game/genre. People weren't lined up to challenge SNES owners on their couch. Then the Genesis got the much better revision a year later anyway.

Probably the one iffy thing I mentioned was SoR, as beat 'em ups popularity was fairly short lived. The other genre's are all still around, and in plenty of numbers, in the AAA field.

I think some people have trouble understanding that popular and influential aren't mutually exclusive qualities.

In the case of Nintendo games many of their franchises are still around so that tends to be people's evidence for the older games being important. That's not saying I deny that Nintendo games inspired future games, of course they did, but during the SNES era we're discussing they were usually making improvements on their older concepts and not creating new genres.

Quote:

---

Metroidvania's pretty much go back to Pitfall 2 on the 2600, let alone something like Super Pitfall and the original Metroid on the NES. Super Metroid influenced the map system and health restoring/game saving checkpoints of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. Where that games RPG elements come from is another guess. Any other metoidvania is either really obscure(but you'll know about it because: internet[hello Shantae]), or an indie project. Hell, none of the Metroid games ever moved Nintendo consoles. Super sold to about 2% of all SNES owners. Not denying the influence on the Castlevania series, but the impact is hardly felt anywhere else, and I'm not sure the Castlevania series pulled through better for it, especially since it alienated Japanese Castlevania fans.

---

Even Super Metroid didn't innovate the save points. Pitfall 2 had an extremely crude version with its checkpoints if that counts for anything and Metroid 2 was the first in that franchise to have save points.

Still, it's hard when looking for the lineage of what-influenced-what since ideas don't exist in a vacuum. Just because one game did it first doesn't mean the same idea didn't occur to someone years later who was completely ignorant to an earlier version of said idea existing. Hence one game may have been the first to do something but not be as well known as a game that did the same thing later and was successful and spawned a thousand clones. The one that spawned the clones would technically be the more influential game, even if it wasn't the "first." Also, eventually we get to a point where a trope is so widespread that the original influence is often lost.

Also I don't know if I would say the "Metroidvania" genre is obscure anymore. Just about every new sidescrolling game incorporates elements from the genre and even other big franchises like Mega Man have dipped their feet in the concept. Even a lot of 3D games have copied Metroid style level progression. It's something that only became much more popular in the past decade but there's a definite impact that can be felt. I think I would definitely consider Super Metroid an influential game, even if it wasn't the game that popularized its own ideas.

3D games tend to blur the lines of genres a lot, so whose to say those "metroidvania" elements aren't "Zelda" elements? You can't progress without the right tools in an action adventure game either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

Looking back you can certainly see that Sega was, in general, much more ahead of the times than Nintendo.
Disk based games, online services with downloadable games, big sports series entries, bundled internet connectivity, and of course a trend towards games that focused on the older side of the age scale.

---

Nintendo never really attempted to push forward hard with advancements, look at the Gameboy for example, very low-power and monochrome screen. They did, and still do, focus on making good solid games on cheaper less cutting-edge hardware, compensating for any deficit in the power of the unit with these games. SEGA, and most other game-console manufacturers today, really focussed on being cutting-edge. Going back to the Gameboy, the best example of the mindset difference is the Game Gear, which despite a similar CPU had a full colour display, which at the time was really exceptional (though of course the battery life suffered for it).

Going back to comparing the SEGA Genesis and Super Nintendo, I honestly think it's really too close to call for most of the differences (on the hardware at least), asides from an edge on graphics capabilities of the SNES, and an edge on raw CPU power on the Genesis. Take the music category on Rolfe's video for example, they are such completely different styles, I honestly think he should have called that category a draw because they're both great at doing their own thing in that respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

3D games tend to blur the lines of genres a lot, so whose to say those "metroidvania" elements aren't "Zelda" elements? You can't progress without the right tools in an action adventure game either.

---

That's entirely true, ultimately the debate gets pointless since you can't prove what influenced what without actual word from the creators themselves.

I do think it's wrong to say the SNES didn't have games that influenced future developers in the same way it is to say the Genesis didn't have games that influenced future developers. It was an all out console war and a lot of original ideas were born from both sides. The real winner of the 16-bit era was the consumer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Qjimbo

Going back to comparing the SEGA Genesis and Super Nintendo, I honestly think it's really too close to call for most of the differences (on the hardware at least), asides from an edge on graphics capabilities of the SNES, and an edge on raw CPU power on the Genesis. Take the music category on Rolfe's video for example, they are such completely different styles, I honestly think he should have called that category a draw because they're both great at doing their own thing in that respect.

---

I agree that people make bigger deals out of the hardware arguments than they need to, probably because we don't have much else to argue about. As a kid I didn't even realize there was much of a difference between the two other than one was Sega, one was Nintendo. Their marketing differences made a much bigger difference in my mind back then than what the consoles were actually capable of.

Actually I was just pondering why I seem to care so much. Like you guys are saying, the consoles are apples and oranges. Yet every time some Nintendo biased [expletive] (and I don't mean all Nintendo biased individuals are, but the ones making these particular arguments...) goes on and on about how it's superior in every possible regard (including arcade games, sports, and shoot 'em ups), it gets to me. I should be able to just let it go, but it irks me that they continue to drone on like they do. Especially when they "know" something completely subjective. Probably because it's the latest generation I play. I probably wouldn't care if I was still keeping up with the latest consoles. It'd be like "Things have moved so far along now, who cares about that old argument?" Which I assume is how most actual Genesis owners at the time have moved on.

I've got no reason to watch anything by Rolfe. I can't be the only one noticing his unwarranted jabs at the Genesis, even outside of the Nerd videos. Not sure what to expect from someone who gets views by "dropping human waste" on people in costume, but there are classier ways to have a bias, than to constantly take shots at the competing product.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnightrider

Actually I was just pondering why I seem to care so much. Like you guys are saying, the consoles are apples and oranges. Yet every time some Nintendo biased [expletive] (and I don't mean all Nintendo biased individuals are, but the ones making these particular arguments...) goes on and on about how it's superior in every possible regard (including arcade games, sports, and shoot 'em ups), it gets to me. I should be able to just let it go, but it irks me that they continue to drone on like they do. Especially when they "know" something completely subjective. Probably because it's the latest generation I play. I probably wouldn't care if I was still keeping up with the latest consoles. It'd be like "Things have moved so far along now, who cares about that old argument?" Which I assume is how most actual Genesis owners at the time have moved on.

I've got no reason to watch anything by Rolfe. I can't be the only one noticing his unwarranted jabs at the Genesis, even outside of the Nerd videos. Not sure what to expect from someone who gets views by "dropping human waste" on people in costume, but there are classier ways to have a bias, than to constantly take shots at the competing product.

---

Probably because it's so common. I mean it would be one thing if the SNES above all sort of mentality was an outlier, but it's pretty prevalent.
Almost anything talking about "classic gaming" is basically just talking about Nintendo a disproportionate amount of time.

So, being a fan of something not Nintendo, it can wear a little thin after awhile.

It's never fun to see people take something that's important to you and go on about how it's worthless and irrelevant, which is what youtube mouthbreathers do with just about anything not Nintendo or Sony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zetastrike

It's never fun to see people take something that's important to you and go on about how it's worthless and irrelevant, which is what youtube mouthbreathers do with just about anything not Nintendo or Sony.

---

..i agree to a point..may i ask why are album sales or movie sales or console sales the end be all of some peoples discussions? ..isn't the quality of a movie, or album or console the most important vs a rival? ..if Def Leopard sold 100 million but at the same time Metallica sold 90 million but that album was considered better, doesn't that count?

http://static.gamesradar.com/images/...icle_image.jpg

..maybe the guy should have put neo geo there as tg16 is 8bit, duh.