Any other Master System fans?

[StarMist]

See, its statements like this which just make you look ridiculous, and to be fair its not often you're really that taken in by nostalgia, and bias, certainly not to this level.

We've been over this: you always think every disagreement with your own opinion a product of nostalgia and bias; evidently so does NZE.

If you you think the SMS has ugly graphics, then how the hell can you stand to play the NES, with its horrific 2bp graphics, and uber low colour sprites?!

As I declared in that NES vs SMS thread I dislike surcharged sprites, the limit being crossed for me when there's more colour than detail. SMS games in general and some for Hucard as well (*) display only a smallish, say at most 150% amount of detail over later NES sprites but have twice to fourfold the colour depth, they're just choked with pigmentation like a silkscreen shirt. Now you and NZE are putting the cart before the horse in presuming/imagining I say to myself "ah the SMS sucks, well then there must be something wrong with the graphics"; that sort of pigmentation is something I've always disliked, especially when it clots over the brushstrokes or whatever composes the details of a sprite whether in a cartoon or a game. I've never watched cartoons but I do like the style of adult(ish) anime which has a high degree of detail and a low degree of pigment; it's the kiddy stuff like DBZ I can't stand. * Most Duo games that interest me being in an anime style or the higher end shmups. The same goes for American cartoons in translation to video games, and Disney of course always has an excellent balance.
Plus NZE prefers the 16 bit gen to 8 bit which necessarily puts him on the opposite side of the fence from me (I'm unsure where you are but 16 bit seems a fair assessment). I feel that apart from exceptions like Sega's in-house games, Nintendo's policy of having cart saves, and the possibility of close arcade fighter and shmup conversions, it was predominantly a graphics over gameplay head-up-its-arse era where both gameplay and graphics went backwards. Graphics did so by adding a muddle of useless under realised details to gametypes that look far better in simplicity, most often (after `91) in low res. SMS games are very much a kindred spirit in 8 bit. But there's no need to argue that as you agree:

Master System is very much an entire generational leap above the NES in graphics

Jackal on SMS would've been nothing but a sea of spray-on tan.
Early NES games I enjoy the appearance for their abstraction. Sometimes, not always.
Naturally graphics don't always or entirely matter, but the SMS library offers exceedingly little special in play. The Zillions are definitely good to very good games; Golvellius is good and certainly leagues better than that dreadful Ax Battler everyone was going on about, I just don't automatically love every game that's built similarly to Zelda, eg Arkista's Ring, and besides the Star Tropics are much better so it's behind the eight ball on at least three NES games; Master of Darkness is quite good despite its strong likeness to Castlevania, a series I can't stand (on the NES! ), and in this case the SMS iteration looks better too; Zaxxon's excellent even in standard 2D and R Type seems flawless (I don't love the series though). I listed a few more in that other thread, Anmitsu Hime was one, but these were pretty much all that left an impression on me. Alex Kidd can just be one of those popular and far from terrible franchises that simply disagrees with me, like Mega Man.

Where I'm concerned using save states is pretty much obviously cheating, and gives a very skewed idea of a game's gameplay.

Cheating at testing a game? That's what I thought would be obvious when I stated I ploughed through the whole SMS ROM set, I really did think it obvious I wasn't playing any of these games to the end. Save states allow one to resume a game from the 2nd/3rd/whatever lv on a later play, not just to erase a wasted life or game over, and that's very helpful when testing a high volume of games. They also do help one get by some frustrating/difficult parts so that a game with a high learning curve or degree of memorisation can be explored more quickly to see if it will be worth the learning or memorisation instead of spending a dogged hour on a game only to find that after the first lv or two it doesn't improve or indeed worsens. They're also a very handy tool for discovering a character's moveset when one hasn't the booklet rather than just dying and resetting over and over. None of that skews anything.

[KnightWarrior]

When I first got online to buy stuff..

The Master System Games was my 1st

[NeoZeedeater]

No they're not. I might as well just call you an indiscriminate glutton, except that's not very useful for discussion.

Yes, loving both Nintendo and Sega games makes me an indiscriminate glutton. Who likes that shitty Sega company anyway? This is Nintendo-16.com, right?

We've been over this: you always think every disagreement with your own opinion a product of nostalgia and bias; evidently so does NZE.

There are so many opinions different than my own on this board all the time that I have no issue with.

[KnightWarrior]

It funny when I don't have money to spend online..I see like 2 Sega Master System II (NTSC) going for cheap, But when I do..I only see them for like $80

[A Black Falcon]

The same could be considered of the Genesis for the first two years. If by "most people" you mean "most people who bought game consoles those years", the Genesis wasn't a hot seller in 1989 or 1990 either. The TG16 and Genesis launched just as the NES hit mainstream sales.

True, it wasn't until Sonic that the Genesis really took off, and the NES was crushing it in 1989-1990, but it WAS ahead of the TG16, at least, and by a good margin too.

Same goes for the Master System by that time, remember Nintendo's stranglehold on retailers? I thought we were talking about which system was more underrated.

True, Nintendo did have a lot of power with retailers, but still, I don't think any of Sega's consoles were as quite as hard to find as the TG16 was...

EBay backs this up too, lots more SMS stuff (even just US only) than TG16. And that's my local impression as well, I see SMS games every once in a while, but TG16 stuff extremely rarely.

This is why the Master System is underrated. Nintendo fans in particular just cannot seem to play the games long enough to stop sticking their noses up at them. I have a similar problem with all of these supposedly "great" NES games as well, but I can figure out what people like about them. The Master System has more good to great games than average or bad, even in the US.

Some of those games are good, sure, but in plenty of cases you're just over-rating them in comparison to NES games.

I mean, I'll give the SMS fake-scaling style titles (rail shooters, behind-the-car driving games and such), but I don't think it really wins any other genre versus the NES. Of course the NES has more bad games, because it has so many more games overall, but it also has a lot more great ones.

We could argue forever about which system had the best "Top 50" and never come to reasonable conclusion. The same doesn't really occur for the TG16, but it has a similar number of good to high quality HuCard games to the Master System and can be similarly compared to "best of lists" for the NES or the Genesis games released the same years.

All three systems had some good games and some not so good ones, sure. I do think that NES standards are probably a bit higher than other systems of the time though... I mean, a game would have to be better to get onto a list, with so much more competition, than it might on another platform.

You can have your opinion that the Master System library isn't very good, but it's wrong.

The Master System library is okay, but the NES library is outstanding.

The NES is awesome but it's not right that it gets more attention than every other '80s console combined. And it sure seems to on the internet. Personally, I'm passionate about trying to get people to play quality underdogs and not just have the mainstream media's view of gaming.

Most American gamers from the mid '80s to early '90s probably had their first gaming experience on the NES, and that's something hard to forget, particularly when it has so many great games... I'll agree that there probably are some '80s systems that are under-rated under the NES's shadow, but even if they do have their share of great games, it does have that shadow for a reason.

Yeah, the GB has more good games in total than the GG (not that that's really relevant to SMS discussion).

It's relevant because a bunch of those later, Europe/Brazil-only SMS games were also released on the Game Gear. But how good games were they to begin with, a lot of the time? Mediocre, more like?

I don't know if I would say it has more top quality titles, at least not in certain genres. The GG Shinobi games are much better than any action-platformers on GB. The Aleste games are above any GB shooters. The GG had top tier portable strategy games with the Shining Force series. Some of the Sonic games, while also on SMS, were among the best portable platformers. The Lynx is the most underrated portable of its gen but the GG had its moments.

GG Shinobi - those games are great, yeah. For the GB, what about something like Ninja Gaiden Shadow, though? Sure, it's really short and easy, but it's a very good game...

Aleste - Gradius: The Interstellar Assault is a better game, but I'd pick those two as the next two best shmups of that generation, on handhelds, yes. But the GG doesn't have much else behind them, and both are pricey import-only titles. The GB does have some import shmups, but it has more good ones that are affordable, including quality titles like Solar Striker, Mercenary Force, Aero Star, sort of Quarth (puzzle/shmup), Nemesis, R-Type and R-Type II (or better, get R-Type DX; it;'s got saving and colorized versions only on the GBC, but on the original GB it does let you play the original versions of either B&W title.), etc.

Shining Force - Yes, the GG has one Shining Force game and also Crystal Warriors, which is awesome. But the other two Shining games, Crystal Warriors' semi-sequel Royal Stone, and all other similar titles were only released in Japan. The GB doesn't exactly have a great strategy game lineup either, sure, but the GG suffers because so few of the titles actually came here. It's even worse for RPGs, where both systems had lots of Japan-only titles, but at least the GB had more than ONE actual RPG release in the West! That's not true for the GG.

Sonic games - I already said that while I do agree the first one's good, the others ... aren't. They aren't BAD, but "among the best portable platformers"? No. They're decent and can be fun, but are way too samey, and don't change enough versus what the Genesis games were doing. Tails' Adventure is an interesting game, though. I just wish it'd had battery save like all Nintendo platformers had had for several years at that point. (Oh, and Sonic 2 GG is just bad.)

I mean, overall, the GG had good platformers, sure, but not in any higher proportion than the GB did. It better have had some good platformers considering how many of them there are on the system, but yeah, it does. But more or even better than on GB, which of course is also loaded with platformers? No way. I don't know of any GG platformers as good as Kirby 2, Wario Land 1 or 2, or Donkey Kong '94, for a few examples. (Oh, my favorite GG platformers of what I've played would probably be Sonic 1, Ristar, Sonic Chaos, and Psychic World. Maybe also Tails' Adventure.)

As for the Lynx, it probably is the msot underrated of the era, yeah, but it IS lacking in platformers, pretty badly. It has only a few of them, and they're not above average mostly... kind of a handicap, when that was the most popular genre at the time. Of course it could do amazing 3d scaling sprites titles, but unfortunately that wasn't selling handhelds in the '90s.

[quote]The "other consoles of its gen wouldn't have been able to handle" part is the visuals. The groundbreaking part is the innovations in other aspects -

- Phantasy Star was a big one at the time. I probably don't need to explain it.

In Japan Final Fantasy and Phantasy Star released at just about the same time, of course, it just took years longer for us to get FF1 than PS1 (and we never got FF's two NES sequels).

- Kenseiden had a depth to its gameplay that made most other action platformers of the day seem simplistic. There was freedom in choosing your path to the end level, what optional training areas to do. It had a large variety of moves to acquire including defensive attacks which were a rarity then.

There certainly are other platformers that allow you to choose paths and have optional areas, moves, etc... I'm not sure how exactly they compare to when Kenseiden was released, though. I do have Kenseiden and it's a fun game, sure. It's not a system seller, but it's fun and does have some depth.

- Wonder Boy III was a big leap forward for platform-adventure games. How many games let you transform into various creatures of land, sea, and air? Its design is unique, timeless and brilliant. It deserves to be remembered alongside NES classics like SMB3 but you sure won't find it on an IGN top 100 because the SMS gets dismissed by the masses.

Haven't played that one. I do like the Genesis Monster World games, though.

- First gen SMS games like Choplifter and Black Belt had several layers of parallax scrolling. I doubt the other consoles could have pulled that off until much later with special chips.

The SMS does have the best Choplifter game of the '80s, sure. Not sure about what on the NES tried software parallax and when, though.

- The SMS was able to do justice to ports of Western computer games. California Games and Ghostbusters were graphically enhanced. SMS Ultima IV is the only port on console that does that series justice. As a computer gamer, one of the games that really blew me away in the mid '80s was Impossible Mission on C64. The SMS remake is still the only version that does justice to the original's gameplay and improves the graphics.

Not very many of those Western computer games actually got console ports, though... on the other hand, the NES does have a lot of versions of mid '80s arcade games, and they're great. Also, stuff like Ghostbusters is on NES too, and sure it looks better on SMS, but the game's just as bad on either system.

- Missile Defense 3D was the first 3d gun game. Plus, the light phaser itself was the smoothest and most accurate home gun. Its games were and still are awesome. Stuff like the Gangster Town's car chase scene was fresh in 1987 even though it's now cliche for the genre.

FIrst 3d gun game? I guess that's something, but did the Famicom 3D Glasses have any gun games too?

As for the light phaser, it and the Zapper seem pretty similar to me. I agree that the SMS does have some good gun games, though.

- Miracle World was the most varied cartoon platformer at the time as far as environments and vehicles and such.

- The SMS was the most colourful console gaming had seen. That allowed for more psychedelic visuals as seen in trippy Space Harrier and Fantasy Zone games.

- Penguin Land was the only console game in the West where you could make and save your own levels. It's a massively improved sequel to one of the pioneers of the puzzle-platform genre. The egg physics really impressed me back then. It's the kind of thing we take for granted in modern games.

Anyway, I don't want to focus too much on the innovation aspect. Shinobi wasn't super innovative. It was like Rolling Thunder with a ninja theme and cool bosses. But it was leagues better than any similar game on NES at the time.

A lot of those are pretty specific things... as if you couldn't come up with a fairly similar list for the NES?

Also, Shinobi's definitely good, but Rolling Thunder's even better, and that was on the NES... (Of course so was Shinobi, but the SMS version is better.) I've always loved the Rolling Thunder arcade game, and the NES version's there, gameplay-wise.

It was more significant in the same way the NES was more significant than the SNES: all those scrolling genres of games were a fresher experience in the 8-bit era because they were being made like that for the first time. That doesn't mean I think 8-bit has better games. I definitely prefer the 16-bit era but newness of that stuff in the 8-bit era had a bigger impact on people that followed the industry's evolution as it happened. A good example would be the SMS introducing Japanese RPGs to the West. In 1988, it was the only system where you could find them in English so it was a big deal. By the time the SNES was out, they were commonplace.

I'd say most people would say that the 4th generation's main focus was on improving what had been begun in the 3rd generation, much like how (visually, particularly) the 6th gen improved on the 5th. So sure. And yeah, I do think the 4th gen is better overall than the 3rd; I love the NES, but the SNES and Genesis are better, I think. But the 3rd isn't too far behind.

Oh, I don't think that the SMS having JRPGs in 1988 while no other system did was a big deal, no. Almost no one cared at all then, how is that a big deal? It's not a big deal when almost no one noticed or cared! It's an advantage for the system, though, sure. But a "big deal"? I don't know about that...

And of course, the SMS didn't follow up those first few with much of anything, while the NES did have a series of major RPG releases in the early '90s (FF, four DQ games, etc.). And even if they weren't as good, it did have some WRPGs too, like a Bard's Tale game, something like three Ultimas, etc. The SMS had what, just Ultima IV?

You said you didn't know the SMS existed as a kid so I'm guessing you might not have the context to fully appreciate it yet.

IF your defense is "you have to have been there at the time to get it", I think that might be a little weak... I mean, I only knew a very little about the TG16 as a kid either (I'd seen a few mentions of it in magazines, and played one once for a few minutes, but that's it), but now I think it's a pretty good system...

The SMS had a decline in the number of quality games released when Sega shifted its best teams to the Genesis. And, coinciding with this, the number of great third-party NES games continued to rise rapidly. That doesn't take away from the SMS having been an awesome, underrated system in the '80s. By 1990 I was more interested in Genesis and TG16 games than what was coming out on the older systems. During the heart of the 8-bit era, it was pretty comparable with the NES.

So you're saying that even though the SMS survived into 1995 in Europe, even there you think game quality wasn't what it had been in the '80s? Alright, I can believe that... but you know, even on the NES, while it did get some great games in the '90s, the frequency of releases DID slow down after the SNES's release in mid '91. For instance, all Nintendo itself released after that in the US were a few puzzle games (Yoshi's Cookie, Tetris 2, Wario's Woods; all also on SNES), Kirby's Adventure, Startropics II, and not a lot else. There were some good later third party titles too, of course, from Konami, Capcom, etc, but overall the frequency of notable NES releases slowed considerably once the SNES released. The biggest difference perhaps is that the SNES launched several years after the Genesis, and Nintendo filled that gap well with high-quality NES games, and the peak of the NES's US success; I'd probably say the NES was at peak from 1988-1990, maybe 1991.

And yeah, I mentioned the SMS being most underrated for gamers in NA (it would probably apply to gamers in Japan as well). I was thinking of games from all regions, though.

The most under-rated system for gamers in NA has to be the Turbo CD, no question.

I really hope your SMS experience isn't limited to just the 35 games you own.

Of course not, but I think that what I have is a pretty good selection of US-released SMS titles. I don't have any sports games (I've seen plenty, just don't care to actually spend money on them; I don't have any NES sports games either, I'm pretty sure), but apart from that I ahve a pretty good variety, and some good games. But sure, I've played other stuff on the system too of course, mostly in emulation.

[sheath]

Some of those games are good, sure, but in plenty of cases you're just over-rating them in comparison to NES games.

I mean, I'll give the SMS fake-scaling style titles (rail shooters, behind-the-car driving games and such), but I don't think it really wins any other genre versus the NES. Of course the NES has more bad games, because it has so many more games overall, but it also has a lot more great ones.

The Master System crushes the NES in psuedo 3D Shooters and Racers, and has a significant edge in Light gun games, and Arcade adaptations. Then there's RPGs, where I'd put Miracle Warriors, Phantasy Star and Ys the Vanished Omens up against whatever the NES has and we'd debate until we die.

All three systems had some good games and some not so good ones, sure. I do think that NES standards are probably a bit higher than other systems of the time though... I mean, a game would have to be better to get onto a list, with so much more competition, than it might on another platform.

The Master System library is okay, but the NES library is outstanding.

Total library, as in 1985-1994, the NES wins because of its later years yes. When the two systems were actually competing in the same market though, it is far from clear which is the winner. Based purely on game recommendations, the NES might have been 10-15% ahead by the end of 1989. Obviously I'm not talking about the mythical AAA system sellers or we would be having a different conversation. I could also argue that the NES received its best games after 1990, but also received most of its library padding sequels and licensed games at the same time.

Also, Shinobi's definitely good, but Rolling Thunder's even better, and that was on the NES... (Of course so was Shinobi, but the SMS version is better.) I've always loved the Rolling Thunder arcade game, and the NES version's there, gameplay-wise.

This "good" vs "better" thing is your primary argument. I suppose these terms equate to points in your mind, like 8/10 versus 9/10 or higher. Whether or not Shinobi (1989) for Master System or Tengen's Rolling Thunder (1989) for NES was better would be a great debate.

Oh, I don't think that the SMS having JRPGs in 1988 while no other system did was a big deal, no. Almost no one cared at all then, how is that a big deal? It's not a big deal when almost no one noticed or cared! It's an advantage for the system, though, sure. But a "big deal"? I don't know about that...

Phantasy Star was was critically praised in all of the magazines, across the board, and sold well enough to open the door for Miracle Warriors, Ys The Vanished Omens and Dragon Warrior on the NES being brought over, not to mention the Genesis receiving Phantasy Star II, Super Hydlide and Sword of Vermillion within its first year. I don't think calling it "a big deal" is an understatement at all.

And of course, the SMS didn't follow up those first few with much of anything, while the NES did have a series of major RPG releases in the early '90s (FF, four DQ games, etc.). And even if they weren't as good, it did have some WRPGs too, like a Bard's Tale game, something like three Ultimas, etc. The SMS had what, just Ultima IV?

This is irrelevant, because all of the focus shifted to the Genesis just as the ripple effect of what Phantasy Star did hit. The magazines were still talking about Phantasy Star in 1990 when Final Fantasy was finally brought over. Think about that, Final Fantasy was up against Phantasy Star II. If we were going to compare the NES library in a proper historical perspective it would be chronologically, and most of it's "outstanding library" wasn't even up against the technically superior Master System, it was up against the full 4th generation.

[Barone]

Maybe it's something with my eyes but I just can't stand the NES's purplescale graphics.

[Kamahl]

Maybe it's something with my eyes but I just can't stand the NES's purplescale graphics.

Eh, I guess it depends on the game. I can't stand the look of the original "NES style" (super mario bros, legend of zelda... you know, the ones with no outlines).

[Barone]

Certainly, but it's just horrid IMO and kinda common in NES games:

[gamevet]

I thought it was rather odd, that Batman was purple instead of gray and black.

[Kamahl]

NES developers certainly liked the color purple.
Doesn't really bother me much but I can see why it may annoy you.

[Thenewguy]

We've been over this: you always think every disagreement with your own opinion a product of nostalgia and bias; evidently so does NZE.

Saying a 2bpp console has better graphics than a 4bpp console is a simple statement against fact

As I declared in that NES vs SMS thread I dislike surcharged sprites, the limit being crossed for me when there's more colour than detail.

This is a flimsy argument, which just makes you sound biased. SMS sprites have as much colour as each developer thought appropriate on a game by game basis.

I mean Jeez I'm having visions of people around here recycling this kind of argument against SNES "Mega Drive has better graphics because the SNES has too many colours for a console with a lower native resolution", or something to that effect

Donald Duck has colour use like the character is supposed to have, Mickey Mouse has colour colour use like the character is supposed to have, Batman has as much colour as he is supposed to have etc.

All of those characters look very low colour in NES games, really noticeably bad, they're just rough approximations of the original characters, and generally look like the designer's ran out of colours before they could do all the important areas (Batman has no face for instance until the sequel)

Check most arcade ports to the two machine, the SMS' sprites don't look oversaturated with colour, they generally just looks much closer to the original arcade source material.

Plus NZE prefers the 16 bit gen to 8 bit which necessarily puts him on the opposite side of the fence from me (I'm unsure where you are but 16 bit seems a fair assessment).

It doesn't sound to me as though you're on the side of 8-bit at all, it sounds as though you're on the side of NES vs everything else, what other 8-bit machines do you prefer over Mega Drive and SNES?

Jackal on SMS would've been nothing but a sea of spray-on tan.

Jackal on SMS would've looked however the developers felt, if they wanted spray on tan it would've had it, if they wanted it as a close approximation of the NES game it would've looked it, if they wanted it more subdued than the (already) slightly oversaturated looking NES game then it would've looked it.

Just look at SMS Star Wars, spray on tan? I don't see it personally.

Cheating at testing a game?

If you're cheating, you're not getting a very accurate picture of the game, period. Whether testing it or not, a game which gives you three lives to complete the game is going to be made extremely easy even if you're just saving at the start of levels, you're not going to bother searching for secret extra lives, you're not going to bother taking things slowly, etc, the pace of the entire game will be completely different, you won't pick up the required skills either, heck, you could probably blunder through a game barely understanding the finer points of its gameplay if you're simply saving states after lucky breaks at hard sections, without needing to learn the best tactic to actually do them consistently. You also completely lose all sense of tension when using savestates, who cares about a particularly difficult jump, or big boss when you know you can simply replay it straight out with no effort?

[NeoZeedeater]

GG Shinobi - those games are great, yeah. For the GB, what about something like Ninja Gaiden Shadow, though? Sure, it's really short and easy, but it's a very good game...

I like Ninja Gaiden Shadow but it's like a watered down version of NES Ninja Gaiden and Shadow of the Ninja. The GG Shinobi games are unique from the their console counterparts (the different ninjas with various abilities) and weren't just good by portable standards. The level design in these games is still brilliant.

In Japan Final Fantasy and Phantasy Star released at just about the same time, of course, it just took years longer for us to get FF1 than PS1 (and we never got FF's two NES sequels).

Was Final Fantasy anywhere near as good, unique, or technically impressive as Phantasy Star? No, not even close.

Haven't played that one. I do like the Genesis Monster World games, though.

You haven't played Wonder Boy III? Dude, that's an instant credibility killer. Many SMS fans consider it the best game on the system and yet you're declaring the SMS library just okay. Since you're such an N64 fan, this is like someone judging that system without having played Ocarina of Time.

FIrst 3d gun game? I guess that's something, but did the Famicom 3D Glasses have any gun games too?

Nope.

As for the light phaser, it and the Zapper seem pretty similar to me.

The Zapper is annoyingly springy, can't do rapid fire, and isn't as accurate. It's not the same experience at all. Atari's XE/7800 gun is closer to the light phaser experience but not quite as accurate or supported by as many good games.

A lot of those are pretty specific things... as if you couldn't come up with a fairly similar list for the NES?

That's not the point (and the Miracle World one isn't so specific; a lot of things became a big part of the genre much later on). I never said you couldn't find innovative titles on the NES. The NES isn't close to being underrated. I'm pointing out unique things that impressed me on SMS.

Oh, I don't think that the SMS having JRPGs in 1988 while no other system did was a big deal, no. Almost no one cared at all then, how is that a big deal? It's not a big deal when almost no one noticed or cared! It's an advantage for the system, though, sure. But a "big deal"? I don't know about that...

Besides what sheath pointed out, I don't care if it was or wasn't a big deal with the general population. It was important to hardcore gamers that were RPG fans. There was a time when the SMS had Miracle Warriors, Phantasy Star, and Ys yet Dragon Warrior wasn't out here yet. That was something special at the time that wouldn't be obvious to someone playing the system late.

And of course, the SMS didn't follow up those first few with much of anything, while the NES did have a series of major RPG releases in the early '90s (FF, four DQ games, etc.). And even if they weren't as good, it did have some WRPGs too, like a Bard's Tale game, something like three Ultimas, etc. The SMS had what, just Ultima IV?

I never said the NES didn't have more WRPGs, just that SMS Ultima IV was most faithful to the computer experience. Plus, super Japan-ified NES Ultima stuff doesn't exactly count as being WRPG.

And yes, the SMS's JRPGs weren't followed up with anything on SMS. They were followed up on Genesis like sheath was saying. In the early '90s, I would rather play Phantasy Star II than those already dated NES RPGs.

[Kamahl]

This is all fine and dandy, but you know what really sucks?
The Atari ST.

Piece of crap that thing is.

I'll go away now.

[Gogogadget]

Haha yep, the Atari ST is a real piece of shit.

As for the SMS, I like it, i'm not gonna buy into 'the graphics are better', but the library of great games is less obvious and requires more digging than the NES, but it has some real winners if you find them.