People should stop freaking out about the Snes's cpu

[Reaperman]

Genesis and SNES were both awfully underpowered systems. Heck that was (and still is) most of their charm. What I think is odd is that the 16-bit debate still focuses on the same two Kmart-grade game consoles. Especially when there were just a ton of early 90's systems out there.

 

Nobody ever accused the Neo Geo of sloth--at least not for the first half decade.

 

 

the whole point of video game consoles are to provide a cheap and easy to use box to play video games. one of the reasons the ps3 and xbox 360 arent doing so well are that they strayed too far from these basic purposes.

Maybe I should rephrase my opinion a bit. It's odd that on a forum where our personal video game collections probably average in the tens of thousands of dollars, we're comparing the power of two mediocre Kmart systems 20 years later. It's not like we can't afford nice things--many of us have prioritized video games to take up a large portion of our time and resources. I know I qualify as a non-standard customer, especially 20 years later.

 

It's a much more interesting conversation when we bring the semi-exotic systems from the period into the mix. Nintendo and Sega had lots of good games, but talking in terms of hardware power, the old Neo Geo was competing directly against 32-bit games in arcades into the late 90's.

Edited April 16, 2010 by Reaperman

[Hatta]

It's just not as interesting to argue that, as the Neo-Geo is clearly more powerful than either the SNES or Genesis. There's no clear winner between the SNES and Genesis, so that's where the arguments happen.

[mbd30]

It's just not as interesting to argue that, as the Neo-Geo is clearly more powerful than either the SNES or Genesis. There's no clear winner between the SNES and Genesis, so that's where the arguments happen.

 

We can argue about which has the better games... Neo-Geo vs SNES and Genesis.

 

As much as I admire Metal Slug, I'd still have to give it to SNES and Genesis in the games department.

[Vic George 2K3]

Personally, I would feel like a burnt weenie if I had to go with the Neo-Geo over Super NES or Genesis, which at least have a wider selection of games to play.

[Hatta]

In the vein of another recent thread in this forum, I'd say the SNES and Genesis both have more good games for them, but the Neo-Geo has a better ratio of good to bad.

[DickNixonArisen]

oh, yeah... things got made for the nintendo systems which should never have been made.

 

Let's do mean, median and mode ...

 

If you put your hand into a box of Geo games that had been selected for purchase randomly and did the same with SNES, the Geo game isn't likely to be bad and the SNES one might, but as far as diversity of gameplay and genres, the Geo lags behind the simple SNES. Plus there's cost.

 

I'm a N fanboy, but I AM big into fighters. I'm going to rule this one a tie. FWWEEEEP

 

I think we could probably come up with a framework for rating systems based on a metacritic style amalgam rating every game for the system and maybe ratings on the controllers and reliability of the deck, having those weigh less overall. That would correct for the fact that it's not really fair to throw the GEO up against the INTV. Here's my go of it - I didn't rate current-gen because it's not fair to the PS3, which hasn't really hit its stride yet, and we can't really tell how much longer the WII has in the spotlight or if anyone will really unlock its true potential or not.

 

NES (innovation, diversity, quality)

SNES (covered all genres incl. FPS, many classics. Best controller ever made. Unforgettable RPGs. CON: sports curse)

ATARI 2600 (diversity, good head-to-head, wide library)

GENESIS (probably the first 'power' system, sold on quality of graphics/music - but still has too many classics to dismiss. Still, sports curse)

CV (better, deeper versions of older games - first system to achieve an arcade-perfect port or close enough)

DREAMCAST (rated high on game quality only - iffy controller, too many dongles, sports curse)

ATARI LYNX (don't know why this isn't more popular - great titles)

SMS (despite standout classics, overall quality low. Controller issues. Granted glasses are awesome, but not widely available.)

GAMECUBE (has a bigger, better library than I first thought, which comes together very cheaply. Good controller. Nice deck design.)

NEO-GEO (good control, great experience, quality titles, but cost-prohibitive and lacks diversity.)

SATURN (awesome, but many great titles weren't brought over, plus overall short lifespan and small library bought at expense)

N64 (sports curse, often ugly graphics, bad controller, poor ratio of good to bad games. Only ranks this high because of quality first party support titles (zelda, mario, kirby etc)

INTV (poor graphically and lacked arcadey action-feel, but still ranks high due to to focus on strategy, more PC type games and complexity of inputs leading to more complex titles)

ATARI 7800 (Doesn't improve much on the 2600, no competitor to other systems of the time. Has some nice exclusives though)

VECTREX (offers something no one else can, but tiny library and problematic hardware combined with limited availibility)

ASTROCADE (neat, but can't compete)

ATARI 5200 (Just can't get past the enormous bulk, poor design and worst controllers ever - as well as the "Do we really need another version of ________" issue. Still, has some good stuff.

Jaguar (give it up guys)

3d0

PC-FX

CD-I

Edited April 17, 2010 by DickNixonArisen

[Dittohead Servbot #24]

It's quite simple; SNES has the edge in graphics/sound, while the Genesis has the edge in raw horsepower. Hence why SNES's Mario games (and their other blue chip franchises like Zelda/Metroid/Donkey Kong) look really awesome graphically and sound great while the Genesis used Sonic to show off their console's speed. Not to say Genesis didn't have their share of graphical works of art, but Genesis knew what their strength was over SNES (and vice versa).

[The_Laird]

The Jaguar library is not nearly as bad as people like to make out and features some of my favourite games of all time (Missile Command 3D, Tempest 2000, AVP, Super Burnout, Battlemorph etc.) and the definative versions of several multi-format games (NBA Jam, Raiden, Cannon Fodder, Doom etc.) So my friend that comment (give it up guys) either makes you a band wagon jumper or an idiot (both pretty much the same thing)

 

And the 7800 is far better than a 2600

Edited April 18, 2010 by The_Laird

[Chickybaby]

I'll keep my 7800, NES, and Genesis. You can keep the SNES.

[atarian63]

I'm also sick of the Snes being thought of as an rpg-only system.

 

I'm sick of Genesis being thought of as a sports games and Sonic-only system.

 

Both of you have good points. I had a SNES and loved it growing up, but I played a lot of Genesis at a friends house during the time also, so I think both systems are very good.

 

Each system had it's pluses. The Genesis had a faster processor so it was better at doing action and shoot-em-ups. The SNES had superior sound and video hardware, so it featured better graphics and music.

 

But a great game could be made for EITHER system if the programer knew what they were doing.

 

The Genesis had some awsome RPG's made for it (the Phantasy Star and Shining Force games) and the SNES had some great fast paced shooting and action games for it (Gradius III, F-Zero, and Contra III)

 

After all, it's not the HARDWARE that determines if a system does well or not -- it's the GAMES.

 

the snes port of gradius iii is an abomination, the quintessential example of 'great graphics are more important than great gameplay'

 

fact is, nintendo had 2 years to come up with a system that bested the genesis in every way imaginable. they didnt

 

Yep, it took till the end of the 16bit era for Nintendo to catch up with Genesis.

In the heyday of 16bit Genesis ruled.

This does not mean Nintendo sucked, Just Sega sold better and was marketed better and really had better games for quite some time as well as a very large number of them.

It's 2010, own them both,all, every console.

[+thegoldenband]

I never had any Sega systems as a kid (except my little brother's Game Gear), but have been playing tons of Genesis lately. I think it's a fantastic system, with loads and loads of great games, many of which can be had relatively cheaply. Its hardware and software are often evocative of the arcade machines of the mid-to-late 1980s, which is a good thing in my book. And "blast processing" aside, it really does often feel a bit snappier than the SNES.

 

But of all the systems ever made, the SNES is probably dearest to my heart, because its graphics, sound, and basic aesthetic are pretty much my ideal for a console system. There's something about the "feel" of it that no other console has ever matched -- there are so many games that I find genuinely haunting, something that's rare on other consoles.

 

Perhaps this is in part because the music written for the system is so damn good. It represented the last stand (and highest achievement IMHO) of the Japanese video game music aesthetic before things went all Poochie. ("He's edgy, he's in your face...TO THE EXTREME!!") And in general, the SNES aesthetic feels like the culmination of video gaming up until that moment. Everything that came afterward represented a fundamentally different direction, exemplified by the PlayStation, 3D gaming, etc.

 

In any event, I think the SNES and Genesis complement each other wonderfully. If the SNES only had backwards compatibility with the NES, then you'd have a lineup that'd suffice for 90% of my post-crash console gaming needs.

[atarian63]

Genesis and SNES were both awfully underpowered systems. Heck that was (and still is) most of their charm. What I think is odd is that the 16-bit debate still focuses on the same two Kmart-grade game consoles. Especially when there were just a ton of early 90's systems out there.

 

Nobody ever accused the Neo Geo of sloth--at least not for the first half decade.

 

 

the whole point of video game consoles are to provide a cheap and easy to use box to play video games. one of the reasons the ps3 and xbox 360 arent doing so well are that they strayed too far from these basic purposes.

Maybe I should rephrase my opinion a bit. It's odd that on a forum where our personal video game collections probably average in the tens of thousands of dollars, we're comparing the power of two mediocre Kmart systems 20 years later. It's not like we can't afford nice things--many of us have prioritized video games to take up a large portion of our time and resources. I know I qualify as a non-standard customer, especially 20 years later.

 

It's a much more interesting conversation when we bring the semi-exotic systems from the period into the mix. Nintendo and Sega had lots of good games, but talking in terms of hardware power, the old Neo Geo was competing directly against 32-bit games in arcades into the late 90's.

Surprisingly (only due to cost) we sold lots of Neo Geo systems and games, a small group of customers but they bought nearly everything we could get us or Japan. Turbo Grafx was similar but mostly japanese import titles. Turbo express,same system big cost, sold lots. Could have been also that you couldnt visit the local kmart and get your Neo geo stuff or adapters or japanese Turbo grafx.

Niche stuff is great!

[jeremysart]

 

That is true. Actually, if you happen across the Super8, you can play NES and Famicom games on your SNES.

 

Oooh, that looks VERY sexy. Is that available for North American SNES?

 

It fits into both the SNES, SFC, and European SNES without modification

[jeremysart]

INTV (poor graphically and lacked arcadey action-feel, but still ranks high due to to focus on strategy, more PC type games and

 

Whoa there, ever play Thunder Castle or Tower of Doom? The Intellivision was not lacking in graphics or sound, or fun. Just a general lack of arcade ports and an awkward controller.

[Multijointed Monster Maker]

I beleive one of the reasons why Genesis games seem to look smoother, has to do with the resolution. Because there are more horizontal pixels, scrolling a background doesn't have the blocky descrete steps the Snes has when it is scrolling a background. Genesis seems to be better at accelerating a backgound with variation in scrolling speed, while snes games always seem to be either scrolling or not.

[johnny_boy]

Architecturally speaking, I believe the SNES was better built to incite developers towards its strengths. Its complex sound chip was certainly more than able to blare out muffled noise, but it was immediately obvious with its sample-based system that you were to create multi-layered instrumentals. Genesis (especially with the disliked GEMS engine), unfortunately was favorable to lazy productions. Most of the 3rd party productions made use of it, often to mediocre results. Graphic-wise, the Genesis must be pushed to make efficient use of the limited color palette, with dithering and flickering. Lack of resources and talent often made it so that products had an inferior look compared to their SNES cousin, especially in static screenshots. It took talented wizards, studios that cared, like Treasure and Blue Sky to make it shine. Lazy or rushed out SNES titles could at least look somewhat nicer, until you picked up the controller to give it a try.

 

I'm not saying Genesis is necessarily the inferior system. It was simply easier to churn out bad games and take the easy way out.

 

SNES was more "future-proof" and bowed more gracefully in its last years.

[Austin]

Talking strictly about system specs and not the quality of each respective system's library, the Genesis clearly had an advantage with its greater amount of raw processing power. Anyone that builds and upgrades computers knows that even the slightest bit of extra power (partcularly in the '90s) can make a major (if not at least a noticeable) difference. The SNES clearly benefitted from having built-in processors for easily implementing specialized graphical effects (mode 7), surely taking heavy loads off the CPU. I feel the added raw power in the Genesis by far made up for that, though, as it enabled it to display the same types of effect with smoother results (of course, with the proper know-how, something the average Genesis developer seemed to lack). Games like Batman & Robin, Dynamite Headdy, Contra Hard Corps and Thunder Force IV are all examples of games that either produced the same kinds of mode 7-esque visuals to better, sharper results (B&R and DH in particular), or were ones that clearly benefitted from the greater amount of raw power with multitudes of chaotic effects, scrolling backgrounds and on-screen action with minimal slowdown (TF and Contra).     

Edited April 18, 2010 by Austin

[high voltage]

ATARI 5200 .....as well as the "Do we really need another version of ________" issue.

 

Nintendo's been doing this for years, in case you haven't noticed.

Edited April 18, 2010 by high voltage

[high voltage]

 

NES (innovation, diversity, quality)

 

 

Much, much more bad than quality, you'd have to agree.

[kool kitty89]

Honestly, the SNES had a lot of advantages over other systems of the time, like 3D capability even without the FX chip (all mode 7 games, like HyperZone, Super Mario Kart, Pilot Wings etc.) Plus the sound, music, and color was superb

I love me an SNES!

Mode 7 tile mode isn't really 3D though, well technically that BG tile is affine mapped and warped in a 3D plane, but that's the extent of it. That's not to say it wasn't useful. (thouhg many would say overused and gimmicky at times) Anyway, for polygon based games the SNES really wasn't up to snuff for even attempting it in software (onboard hardware/CPU), hence there being about 1 game that did so... Race Drivn' was a bit of a stretch for the system. (though it was ported to much lesser platforms) The Genesis strugled with such games of course, as did the contemporary Amiga and ST (and late 80s-1990 ish PCs), but they were playable, at least for the time.

Then there's software raycasting and scaling, which both systems did, the SNES surprisingly well with Wolf3D (butchered by censorship), that one used a trick though: it rendered onto a mode 7 tile of 112x96 pixels scaled to 2x, filling 224x192 pixels on-screen (zoomed in, basically), pretty novel idea though. (makes me wonder a bit why it wasn't used for anything else)

The Genesis lacked the RAM for Wolf3D (the SNES barely had enough for a highly optimized hacked up port), but there are other examples, like Battle Frenzy (pretty choppy but quite large viewing area), Zero Tolerance (pretty small viewing window), and TecToy's "Duke Nukem 3D."

 

I'm tired of every single game review for a run'n'gun or shmup game having an inappropriate snide remark about the Snes's processing power. Such as "There is soo much stuff going on, the Snes's cpu can't handle even half the action without slowing to a crawl!"

 

I'm also sick of the Snes being thought of as an rpg-only system.

 

That's a bit silly... complaining about actual slowdown is one thing, but going into random technical stuff for those who don't have a clue what they're saying is BS. (some reviewers aren't clueless though, in which case it's legitimate IMO)

 

The 2 systems do have a good deal of trade-offs, some of which are personal taste (like the sound), though A/V output quality varies much more widely on different Genesis revisions than the SNES (or TG-16/PC-Engine), RGB is rock solid on all models for users with that option (ie JP and EU users), but Composite video tends to be a fair bit weaker on the Genesis (varies a good bit as 4 different video encoders were used on various models) and RF is often down right mediocre (average at best), the sound is poor on the final revision of the model 1 systems and several model 2 revisions, though the Genesis 3 is generally decent (but mono only) and composite tends to be good too, the CXS, X'Eye and such tend to have good sound too. (the WonderMega even had S-video output unlike other stock consoles)

 

Comparing the hardware itsself always gets a bit hairy, the SNES has more subpalettes (16 to the gen's 4, TG-16 has 32), and 15-bit RGB master palette to the Geny's 9-bit (like Atari ST and PC-Engine/TG-16), resolution (MD has the 320 wide mode, SNES is stuck at 256 for all intents and purposes), and the CPU.

Comparign the CPUs is a bit touch due to the very different architectures, the 65816 has faster but less powerful instructions, 8-bit bus with 1 cycle accesses vs 16-bit bus with slow accesses, needing more accesses due to limited registers, etc etc. Overall, from previous discussions, at 3.58 MHz, the SNES's CPU is still more than 1/2 as fast as a 7.67 MHz 68k, I seems to remember it coming down to around 70-80% in such a discussion, but the other problem is that the SNES's CPU is stuck at 2.68 MHz much of the time (DRAM is limited to that and many games use cheaper ROM on a 2.68 MHz bus). It was noted that in cases of a couple re-releases of games that switched from 2.68 MHz ROM to 3.58 MHz ROM, slowdown was noticeably reduced. (SMW compared to SMW Allstars was one example)

 

I've wondered why Nintendo opted for such a slow clock speed when a far higher one should have been easily possible, this thread shed some more light on the issue: http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/159269-its-1990-your-designing-a-game-system-what-would-you-do/page__st__50__p__1977472#entry1977472

So unlike a normal 6502 or 65C02, the way the 65816 is set-up with multiplexed addressing means that memory had to be clocked 2x as fast as the CPU, that's even more extreme when you compare it to things like the Z80 and 68000 which have multi-cycle memory accesses, allowing RAM to be slower than the CPUs. (650x needs memory at equal speed to not have wait states)

 

There is, of course, other discussions involving not the SNES vs Genesis CPU, but bringing the PCE/TG-16's 7.16 MHz 65C02 derivative into the fray as well, and that only complicates things more. (it's generally got a big advantage over the SNES's CPU and, depending on the case, a speed advantage over the 68k too, with equivalent optimization -as a very vague summary) Again, that's just complicates matters.

 

 

I'm also sick of the Snes being thought of as an rpg-only system.

 

I'm sick of Genesis being thought of as a sports games and Sonic-only system.

Funny thing is that the MD got more RPGs released in Europe than the SNES... Not that they were popular: EU was apparently VERY anti-RPG, reviews generally panning them; still Sega released them in spite of this while Nintnedo didn't: Sega released pretty much every first party RPG they did in the US (Phantasy Star, Shining Force, etc) while EU got no Final Fantacy (NES), no Dragon Warrior, No Ultima, no FFII (IV), FFIII (VI), no Super Mario RPG, no Chrono Trigger, etc. (FFVII was the first RPG to really break the stigma, and the first FF game released in EU)

 

Only an idiot and/or very ignorant individual would think the SNES was an RPG only console... Hell, I only own 2 RPGs on the system... It's 2D sidescrolling heaven like contemporaries. Tons of platformers, quite a few racing games (mode 7 and not -ie out run style), etc.

 

I like the Genesis gamepad more (3-button feels better than 6 button which is better than SNES), but other than that, I think it's really up to a game by game basis, some things are hardware limitations, all are limited by programming skill.

 

Yet the Genesis/Megadrive always had less sprite flicker and always played games faster too.

 

And the stuff about the SNES being the first to have 3D effects is a total lie - I think you find that was the Atari Lynx.

Well duh the SNES wasn't the first to have 3D... In that respect, the Vectrex might be considered the first home console to manage 3D effects...

It really depends on what you mean by 3D as mode 7 really isn't 3D. (the tile itsself is arguably so, but the games aren't)

 

If you're talking polygons, the NES got a port of Elite... (popular on several 8 bit home computers too of course, and plenty of other examples too)

And that's only if you're looking at dedicated home video game consoles. (even though in Europe several home computeres competed directly in basically the same market)

 

i think someone's just upset coz genesis does what nintendon't

 

Here's something Nintendon't:

 

Have their hardware division go tits-up after four failed systems in a row. (Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Dreamcast)

Whoa... I'm not going to get into this, but the whole thing is pretty complex and a discussion I'm regularly involved in, but all I'm saying is that I don't think the Sega CD should be considered a failure for what it was... and it probably wouldn't be had Sega not subsequently made a huge mess out of themselves... And Saturn was successful in Japan, of course.

We don't need more tangents in this thread though.

 

 

Some how I doubt it's using the SNES processor in 8bit mode. More like it's a mini NES packed via crappy emulation and the video (register writes and data updates) is passed onto the snes cpu to send to the sPPU (like how the wideboy works for the NES and the super gameboy works for the SNES).

It's most definitely a whole famiclone, not like Sega's Power Base converter, it also has to use it's own AV output, I think pulling the SNES's video through too. (composite only)

It's not emulation though and neither are most famiclones. (or clones in general -that godawful Fire Core is an exception)

 

 

I'm not saying Genesis is necessarily the inferior system. It was simply easier to churn out bad games and take the easy way out.

 

SNES was more "future-proof" and bowed more gracefully in its last years.

I'll say that's pretty subjective... While FM synthesis is a bit of a personal taste issue, the SNES has plenty of examples of sounding "samey" too and there are soem truely bland and awful examples. Not just GEMS, of course, but other sound engines with similar results, like EA own sound engine which sounded very similar.

Earthworm Jim and Earthworm Jim 2 are key exceptions for Gems though, albeit they didn't stick with the stock instruments, but it is GEMS.

BTW, a big reason for the popularity of GEMS was that, unlike most other engines (including Sega's SMPS), GEMS was rather usable by non-programmers, with midi support and the ability to listen to the composition as it was being arranged, it supported MIDI too. To work in SMPS you had to be able to program, so you either needed a sound designer who could program, ot a sound team of sound designers and programmers partnered.

 

I grew up with Nintendo stuff and have only recently gotten into the Genesis (and Sega CD, 32x eventually -emulation ATM), but I was also a PC gamer growing up in the 90s and the Sound blaster probably influenced my feelings toward FM Synthesis.

 

Honestly I think they're close enough such that any game on one could be managed on the other on acceptable levels, but any playing to ones strengths would be at a disadvantage on the other without being significantly altered.

 

 

NES (innovation, diversity, quality)

 

 

Much, much more bad than quality, you'd have to agree.

True for any popular platform, of course, the more popular, the more crap. (ie PSx and PS2)

 

 

The best thing about SNES DOOM is that they pulled it off at all. It's an interesting tech demo, if nothing more. It's (was) pretty unexpected (at least to me) when it came out, and it's still playable and has the positive attributes you mention.

It's playable, if barely. It definitely had a lot more time and optimization made than some other ports, though I'll have to say the 32x version is much more playable. The SNES had fewer modifications to levels different trade-offs on textures, etc. They had only the 21.48 MHz RISC GSU to work with 128 kB of RAM (plus the SNES CPU and its 128 kB), but the former also had to be used for a framebuffer for rendering the game, and then there's the 2 MB of RAM limit. 32x was pretty limited with 256 kB of RAM (plus separate framebuffer) and 3 MB of ROM, but that's still better off than the SNES+SFX.

The 32x port is obviously rushed and less optimized than it could be, but it is interesting to look at the bets, including an early full-screen version with maps and textures very similar to the PC and a couple later ones with smaller screens but same map/textures. (music was different too, simpler but far less grating for E1M1)

 

Still, a fair amount of the music was decent (some better than Soundblaster on PC), the SNES only had a couple more levels (just spread out more and hand picked), plus the SNES had the stupid difficulty system and lack of saves while 32x has a simple level select.

 

It seems like they started doing their own conversion straight from PC, but as the Jag version was completed decided to take that example for optimizing in limited memory. (cut down levels, textures, etc are very similar in Jag, 32x, 3DO, and PSX/Saturn -albeit 32x is missing more) Plus 32x lacks shading which even the SNES managed (albeit a bit funky). THe Jaguar version had awesome shading though and PSX/Saturn still better than DOS.

 

Agreed. The 32x DOOM sucks big time. Have to compensate by playing 32x Virtua Racing.

Meh I still think it's not bad for a rushed port, it was in development while the Jag version was too, I think it might be the second port completed even. I personally find the 32x version more playable, though both are pretty limited. For console gamers in 1995, not much other option though. Jag and PC users had better versions, and depending on you PC, Jag (or 32x) might play better (Jag has smooth shading too), I'm partial to playing vanilla DOS DOOM though, even though I never played it back then. (X-Wing was my biggest PC game in the mid 90s and I don't think my parents wanted their 6/7 year old playing Doom...)

 

Good thing we don't have to choose sides in this battle. I'll bet most people here bought $10 systems at thrift stores years ago and play both.

My SNES is on one side of the TV, and Genesis+CD on the other.

[johnny_boy]

BTW, a big reason for the popularity of GEMS was that, unlike most other engines (including Sega's SMPS), GEMS was rather usable by non-programmers, with midi support and the ability to listen to the composition as it was being arranged, it supported MIDI too. To work in SMPS you had to be able to program, so you either needed a sound designer who could program, ot a sound team of sound designers and programmers partnered.

 

I was vaguely aware of GEMS' approachability from a composer's point of view, and believe this easily explains its mass popularity back in the day. You are right of course when referring to EWJ 1&2's customized use of it, to great results. I just have this impression that too many developers didn't warm up to the Genesis' untapped potential, and saw it in an unfavorable light when compared to its rival. The SNES' specs initially seem more appealing, its later release gives an impression of "latest tech", even though the specs were finalized early on in its dev cycle. Tom Kalinske was quoted as saying that he had the great challenge of selling an "inferior product", and Capcom never really warmed up to Gen's tech.

 

When pushed to its limits, both consoles can do an outstanding show, but I think it was harder (required talent) to do so on Sega's 16-bit offering.

[Video]

Someboyd mention "hard Drivin'" That game is the shizzle, and yet another that shows how well the SNES can do, this was before the FX chip, and yet, IMO the SNES was pulled off much smoother, and even a little faster tahn the Gen version (yes I have both, I much prefer the SNES game)

 

 

And the 7800 is far better than a 2600

 

Bonus points for the fact that it has a 2600 built in

 

Yep, it took till the end of the 16bit era for Nintendo to catch up with Genesis.

In the heyday of 16bit Genesis ruled.

What's most funny about that statement, is that Genesis was in production a year or two after the SNES released it's last title

Edited April 18, 2010 by Video

[kool kitty89]

I was vaguely aware of GEMS' approachability from a composer's point of view, and believe this easily explains its mass popularity back in the day. You are right of course when referring to EWJ 1&2's customized use of it, to great results. I just have this impression that too many developers didn't warm up to the Genesis' untapped potential, and saw it in an unfavorable light when compared to its rival. The SNES' specs initially seem more appealing, its later release gives an impression of "latest tech", even though the specs were finalized early on in its dev cycle. Tom Kalinske was quoted as saying that he had the great challenge of selling an "inferior product", and Capcom never really warmed up to Gen's tech.

 

IDK, I've seen a fair amount of Capcom games that were pretty well done on the MD, I like SFII SCE more than SNES Turbo or especially WW (granted that's the first home port of SFII), the main issue is the mediocre sample playback capcom used, but it could be worse -space limitations is one thing but quality of sample playback code is another. I prefer a lot of the music on the Genesis (Ken's theme is a big one, Guile's theme is one of the examples of the SNES doing better though), regardless the PC-Engine port had better sample quality than either.

On the samples though, they could have used compression to help save space, but I don't think any developers used such a scheme with realtime decompression on the Z80, there's been work in homebrew though: http://gendev.spritesmind.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8957&sid=0cb84481d9a4dd7932f4b9dc542d7ab0 (really interesting is the ADPCM derivative on page 3) It's a bit surprising that wasn't attempted by developers back then, unless there were some examples. (then again, sega not connecting the IRQ line on the YM2612 also hurt PCM)

 

Interesting that Capcom released the Mega Man compilation on the MD and no such on SNES, though the limited release and Sega-Channel only meant it's rather obscure. (that and very poorly optimized, tons of slowdown -not as bad in PAL though -or with overclocking, the slowdown is really bad though and oddly random in some way -worse than slowdown in NES originals) The remixed music is really awesome though, it's interesting that I was thinking about how well the MM games music would work on the MD before I found out that game even existed, and the music did not disappoint.

 

 

Someboyd mention "hard Drivin'" That game is the shizzle, and yet another that shows how well the SNES can do, this was before the FX chip, and yet, IMO the SNES was pulled off much smoother, and even a little faster tahn the Gen version (yes I have both, I much prefer the SNES game)

I mentioned that and it is notable but it's even choppier than the Genesis version (odd that there's some better use of color as it's still using a 16-color mode and they way polygon games render it would be limited to a single palette other than for sprites/overlay).

 

However, it's not hard drivin, but Race Drivin' (both are on Genesis). I am curious why they didn't use any coprocessors though, Super FX wasn't there yet (and was expensive), but I'd think the DSP-1 chip Nintedo had would have been useful.

[Hatta]

16-bits is about 8-bits too many.

No problem, the 65816 is backwards compatible with the 6502, so I guess the SNES should be able to run 8-bit code too.

 

That is true. Actually, if you happen across the Super8, you can play NES and Famicom games on your SNES.

 

A few of these have shown up on ebay:

 

eBay Auction -- Item Number: 170445452881

 

Thought some of you might like to know.

[recspecz]

 

What's most funny about that statement, is that Genesis was in production a year or two after the SNES released it's last title

 

The Genesis is STILL being produced to this day. Well, it's not THE Genesis, but it is still licensed by SEGA. The Firecore and Gencore are what I'm talking about.

 

Of course, 20-year old chipsets are not hard to emulate, which is why you get 3-way systems from ybit, or whatever the hell its name is.