SNES

[Rayek]

Personally, I've never been a fan.

[Drixxel]

To all who think the N64 has aged poorly, I implore you to take a look at any first generation PlayStation title. Compare the everpresent N64 texture blur to the spotty texture warping and various 3D glitching of so many PlayStation releases.. which is more distracting and indicative of weak 3D? It's not as if the Saturn was a 3D powerhouse, either. Low poly models and faked transparencies are telltale signs of aged hardware, but at least it was free of hideous texture mishaps. That generation was plagued with unique graphical flaws that are consistent with the evolution from 2D-dominated gaming to 3D.. there were still a lot of kinks to work out. It all comes down to the direction of your bias when determining which of the three was the supposed "worst."

[j_factor]

To all who think the N64 has aged poorly, I implore you to take a look at any first generation PlayStation title. Compare the everpresent N64 texture blur to the spotty texture warping and various 3D glitching of so many PlayStation releases.. which is more distracting and indicative of weak 3D? It's not as if the Saturn was a 3D powerhouse, either. Low poly models and faked transparencies are telltale signs of aged hardware, but at least it was free of hideous texture mishaps. That generation was plagued with unique graphical flaws that are consistent with the evolution from 2D-dominated gaming to 3D.. there were still a lot of kinks to work out. It all comes down to the direction of your bias when determining which of the three was the supposed "worst."

Although I see your point, I still think N64 graphics were inferior. Graphically speaking, I think Threads of Fate is better than Majora's Mask, NiGHTS is better than Mario 64, etc. It's hard to give lots of direct-comparison examples, simply because with the limited n64 library it's hard to match up PSX/Saturn games of a similar style that came out around the same time, but I honestly think that overall, N64 usually produced uglier graphics. There were actually occasions that playing N64 literally hurt my eyes because they were trying to bring the image in front of them into focus, and they couldn't.

[Elusive]

Although I see your point, I still think N64 graphics were inferior. Graphically speaking, I think Threads of Fate is better than Majora's Mask, NiGHTS is better than Mario 64, etc. It's hard to give lots of direct-comparison examples, simply because with the limited n64 library it's hard to match up PSX/Saturn games of a similar style that came out around the same time, but I honestly think that overall, N64 usually produced uglier graphics. There were actually occasions that playing N64 literally hurt my eyes because they were trying to bring the image in front of them into focus, and they couldn't.

Sad thing is, 'greats' on the system are like playing 'great' games on a substandard machine. Perfect Dark becomes Slideshow City really really easily, for example.

[Black_Tiger]

Would you agree with this statement?

=================================

Genesis. The SNES had like three good exclusive games:

Super Mario World
Donkey Kong Country
Super Mario Kart

Then, we have the slew of overrated "classics" such as Zelda 3, Super Metroid (boring as fuck), Super Castlevania 4, Yoshi's Island, Earthbound,Diddy Kong's Quest and the Mega Man X games.

Now, let's look at the classic titles for the Sega Genesis:

Sonic the Hedgehog 2
Streets of Rage 2 (Beats all three Final Fight games)
Beyond Oasis (better than Zelda 3)
Gunstar Heroes
Dynamite Headdy
Ristar (on par with Mario World)
Shining Force series
Phantasy Star series
Robocop vs. Terminator (better than the SNES version).
Sonic the Hedgehog 3 + Knuckles (Super Mario who?)
Ghoul's and Ghosts (Better than Super GnG.)
Street Fighter 2 Championship edition
Yu Yu Hakusho. (All of the "anime" fighters on the SNES were disgraceful.)
Plus, without my Genesis I wouldn't be able to play Sonic CD, the greatest platform game of all time.

So, the Genesis pretty much owns the SNES at all levels. True, the SNES had better graphical and audio capiblities but if nearly all of the games on the system are shit, then who cares?

I also loved when the screen rotated around in games like SC4, Ghouls n Ghosts and that shitty Mohawk game. Nothing like a tad of motion sickness to make your gaming experience complete!

Also, the SNES controller was poorly designed. The actual look of the console look horrible and clunky in comparison to the sleek and sexy Genesis look. So, you guys can stick with your three good games,

With the SNES we have quantity over quality. With the Genesis, we have a large range of great games, covering a wide variety of genres. The Genesis had a great selection of RPG's, fighting games, shooters and platform games while the SNES had a ton of boring RPG's and a ton of dire liscensed games (so did the Genesis but not to the same extent.)

Now, I'm gonna go play Bebe's Kids.

~Vorty

I don't agree. Even if I did agree with the idea that the SNES' games mostly sucked, the list of good SNES games would still be much longer, as would the Genesis'.

Like most(all?) successful consoles, both the Genesis and SNES suffered from a slew of overrated and just plain garbage games. Both have quantity over quality and both Sega and Nintendo made millions by selling lincenses for all those games. But that still leaves a huge number of great titles.

I like how the SNES got summed up with "like three good exclusive games", but the Genesis list includes lots of multiplatform titles. Including "Robocop vs. Terminator (better than the SNES version)" -which makes it sound like it's the only example you could think of, which makes it sound like it's the exception to the rule.

Why is SFIICE listed for the Genesis without an explanation? Did the SNES miss out on Street Fighter II ports?

I don't believe that Ghoul's and Ghosts is better than Super GnG, but Ghosts N Goblins definately beats them both, so I guess we should all trade in our Genesis' for NES'?

I love Sonic CD, it's my favorite Sonic game. But I don't think it should simply be called or judged simply as a platformer and certainly not the be-all end-all one.

If you really believe that "nearly all of the games on the system are shit", then you must also really hate the Genesis and gaming in general.

Finally, why is this being posted here? Shouldn't it be posted in some kind of Nintendo/SNES forum?

DKC is a milestone indeed.

It ushered in a mentality that was easily wowed by shinny graphics when inventive, or even good gameplay just wasn't there. Continued today by such things as the shinny-ness of Xbox360.

Didn't the 16-bit generation (first led by the Genesis) in general start this? 8-bit games relied more on gameplay than graphics. Didn't Mortal Kombat (and others) beat DKC to this milestone years earlier?

I love the idea of expansion chips in carts. Instead of designing the system correctly the first time, we get to instead pay inflated prices for cartridges that have chips in them to make them run at an acceptable speed (Kirby's Dreamland 3 is still insanely slow). Way to ass-rape the consumer, Nintendo!

Didn't like every single NES/Famicom game after the early Coleco looking ones have a chip in them?

A crippling selection indeed, but Super Mario 64 was a far stronger launch title than anything the Saturn had to offer upon release.

Except that when the Saturn launched, 3DO and Jaquar were the 32 & 64-bit standards. Although Mario 64's a great game, it's not as impressive as Daytona and Panzer Dragoon were for me when I bought them at the early Saturn launch.

Where as Mario 64 came out at the same time as Crash & NiGhTs and all those other Saturn & PSX games were already out.

[nate]

Honestly, I don't even play my Genesis much anymore. Under my TV is an SNES, a Saturn, an XBox and a PS2. The SNES has a huge advantage in RPGs which makes it more replayable than the Genesis, to me anyway. Ditto with the Saturn and PS1. I have not taken my N64 out of the closet since 2001, when I bought a Dreamcast. I'd honestly rather play Panzer Dragoon Saga and Final Fantasy 7, 8, 9 than anyhting on the N64.

The Genesis and the N64 were more fun than their counterparts during their life span, but their replayability after 17 and 10 years (respectively) isn't so good. I spent twice as much time with my Genesis as my SNES from 1992-1996 and twice as much time with my N64 as my PS form 1996-2001, but the SNES, PS1, and Saturn all did me better in the long run. It is partially graphics, partially game library, and mostly personal taste. I still love both my SNES and Genesis, it doesn't matter which is "better".

[j_factor]

The SNES has a huge advantage in RPGs which makes it more replayable than the Genesis, to me anyway.

I can understand preferring SNES in terms of RPGs, but this comment struck me funny. To me, RPGs are far less replayable than action/arcade/platformer games. An RPG is more of a commitment, and so I will only play one when I properly set aside the time for it. But an action game I can just casually pop in anytime and have fun.

[Joe Redifer]

Agreed.

[ary incorparated]

come on pd is to short and to simple to compete with Mario 64,mario64 had many hours of gameplay,but the graphics are sometimes bit shit it looks nice but is to blurry or something. come on Daytona on saturn is almost a too shitt crap ugly game, man ROOOOOOOOOOOOLing start how gay does that sound Dayy ie tonaaaaaaaaaaa lets go away lets go away Day ie tonaaa aaaaaaa Day ie Day ie ie Day i Day i I Daytonaaaaaaaaaaaaa(Double chorus)the text is right lets go away man the game is the opposite from its arcade version.

[Henry Spencer]

Everyone talks about the look, like it is the only thing that matters, I don't give a damn, thats why I prefet the N64 over the SNES, better gameplay.

[Vyse of Arcadia]

Everyone talks about the look, like it is the only thing that matters, I don't give a damn, thats why I prefet the N64 over the SNES, better gameplay.

I have one thing to say to that:

Yoshi's Island.

That's why I will always prefer the SNES to the N64.

[Drixxel]

I have one thing to say to that:

Yoshi's Island.

That's why I will always prefer the SNES to the N64.

Yoshi's Island truly is a fantastic game. As much criticism as "chipped carts" have gotten in this thread, if that extra chip makes a game like Yoshi's Island possible, there should be no complaining. Had Sega developed a chip that could have theoretically expanded the Genesis colour palette, or in some way corrected another supposed hardware shortcoming, would there be similar disdain for chipped Genesis carts?

[j_factor]

The problem with chipped carts is that:

1. They're more expensive
2. They were used/needed too often on SNES

[GeckoYamori]

Owning a SNES was a big no no to me as most titles at the time were way, way out of my price range. Best thing I could do was rent it from time to time.

I refuse to spend more than $50 on a new title, unless it's some super limited special edition. Nintendo had some pretty mean game prices even on games that weren't chipped, and this lasted all the way to the N64 era.

[Vyse of Arcadia]

Yoshi's Island truly is a fantastic game. As much criticism as "chipped carts" have gotten in this thread, if that extra chip makes a game like Yoshi's Island possible, there should be no complaining. Had Sega developed a chip that could have theoretically expanded the Genesis colour palette, or in some way corrected another supposed hardware shortcoming, would there be similar disdain for chipped Genesis carts?

Maybe, maybe not. On the one hand, chipped carts are more expensive, as j_factor pointed out. On the other hand, the did a lot to overcome console limitations.

I've always looked at the SNES hardware strategy and the Genesis hardware strategy as two sides of the same coin. The former put chips in carts to expand their capabilities. The latter produced hardware expansions for the console to improve its capabilities. Both methods lead to the same thing...increased capabilities at an increased price. I think had the Sega CD and 32x really caught on, the playing field would have been even. On the one hand, SNES games would be individually more expensive. On the other, Genesis/Sega CD/32x games would have been cheaper, but required expensive additional hardware.

I think the SNES had a more solid buisiness strategy. A game is still more of an impulse buy than a multi-hundred dollar hardware expansion.

But I'm not going to even touch which strategy was technically better. That's an argument I don't care to get into.