Topic: 2-3 times powerful

[Ages]

Sorry, but there are too many things wrong with this post to leave unreplied:

"First take NES to SNES, the SNES really wasnt a big leap over NES, it mostly was faster and had more ram, better sound chip and mostly highr resolution and more sprites.bigger sprites for more details. Sega Genesis actualy was faster, had slightly less ram, but still had a better graphcis chip and its soundchip was still fairly comparable. When compared side by side it was VERY HARD to prove which system ahd better graphics, they REALLY WERE that close, this is form some one who has BOTH and I have the BEST games form both so I can make comparisons without looking at the tech specs, which I have compared to death also."

What?  Surely you jest.  The SNES was leaps and bounds over the NES in graphical quality.  If you want to argue that point, compare Metroid to Super Metroid and we'll talk.  The Genesis wasnt a better system than the SNES graphically either.  I too own both systems, and I've always noticed that Genesis games never looked as clear as the SNES games.  Interestingly enough, although they had an abundance of graphical power at their disposal, Nintendo rarely took full advantage of it (see Super Mario Kart).  They weren't that close, the SNES had a much larger graphics pallet and all the Genesis had was something called "Blast Processing" haha.  Seriously though, both were good, but the visuals in Vectorman couldn't hold a candle to those in Donkey Kong Country (keep in mind, Vectorman was specifically made to show that the Genesis could do whatever the SNES could).

"The 'leap' from Genesis to Saturn wasnt that big either. Teh Saturn was desgined as a 2-D system first and teh 3D was added last minute. BUt when comparing 2D capabilities all Saturn did was bsacialy doubled the number of sprites, increased the number of lpaying feilds and improved resolutions and added mreo colors and ram, but when the 3D chips were added all they did was put 2 identical chips and lumped them together. The Saturn actualy DID have more powerful 3D capabilities and MORE RAM than PSx, and some how Sony still managed to make gamse look better on thier system. Having had both and comparing multiplatform games it was obhvious that Saturn was the better system."

The jump from the Genesis to Saturn was substantial as well.  It wasnt as large a jump as between the NES and SNES, so you would have to look for the smaller things to see how much more impressive it was.  Namely, framerate.  Fighting games on the Saturn were incredibly smooth, better than that of the Playstation.  The 3D chips Sega put in the Saturn werent all that hot, not to mention it was a bitch to develop for.  The PSX had better 3D graphics, no if's and's or but's about that.  The games looked better on the PSX for the simple fact that it took less effort to get those kinds of results out of the system.  Not to mention, consumers saw one system $100 cheaper than the other.

"Saturn and PS combined were still technologicaly INFERIOR to N64 and yet it still managed to get out sold by PS and only sold better than Saturn because Sega was stupid at marketing and running their business."

The N64 was outsold for a variety of reasons, including: Nintendo's cocky attitude towards 3rd party developers, the use of carts over CD's (go carts!), the inability to release the 6DD (possibly), lack of developer support at the end, and image.

"Historicaly GRAPHCIS HAVE NEVER MATTERED."

I wouldn't go that far.  Recently graphics havent mattered nearly as much as the content (as opposed to gameplay), but in the early days of gaming, everyone wanted arcade perfect conversions of Pac-Man and Donkey Kong.  Truth be told, graphics havent been relevent in systems since the demise of arcades in America.

"Take those other competing systems at teh time, Neo Geo was leaps and bounds seperior to SNES and Genesis and yet it failed to catch on despite critical acclaim and awesome games, it lacked mostly in variety as it wasa fighting game machine and everything else was an after thought, but it produced some of the BEST fighting games ever."

The Neo-Geo was much more powerful than the SNES and Genesis at the time, true.  They offered "arcade-perfect" games for their home system.  But this would come at a price of nearly $600 for the system alone, and $200 per GAME.  At those prices, no one except the truely diehard fan could afford this luxury in home gaming.

"3Do was released at same time as Sega CD and long before PS or Saturn and was in direct competition witrh SNES and Genesis/Sega Cd and they all three managed to out sell 3Do for a long time, by the time Ps and saturn came out it was already history"

Ahh, the 3DO, first attempt at a "gaming hub" was another grossly overpriced piece of hardware that valued its VHS player more than the games it could play.

"Also Atari Jaguar with its CD addon was quit capable of producing graphics on par with PS and N64, but developers chose to use the familiar 16bit chip they moronicaly stuck in and caused most games to look bad in comparison"

Not sure what you're talking about here, but the Jaguar is widely considered a 32-bit system, rather than it's claimed 64-bit power.  There's no way that they put in a 16-bit chip that actually did something worthwhile in the system.  I know Atari made dumb decisions, but a 16-bit processor in 95' while everyone is switching to 32/64?  They weren't that stupid.

"Original colorless GB out sold 16bit FULL COLOR LinX, fairly colorful game Gear, Full COlor 16 Bit Nomad, and even its own partner 32 Bit Virtual Boy, and that is quit a feat for any system to achieve"

Keep in mind that the number top priorities for handheld gaming are price, battery life, game library and durability.  These, most importantly battery life, gave the Game Boy the edge it has had since it debuted in 89'.

Graphics don't have that much of an influence in gaming anymore as much as image and content.  Unless one system lags so far behind in power it cannot compete (N-Gage comes to mind) or truely looks bad compared to the others, graphics arent as important as they are made out to be.  

[Galford]

I was going to reply to what animecyberrat said, but someone already beat me to it.
Well done Ages...

[Bloodworth]

Hey Galford is still around... and Ages, is that a cookie?

[Bill Aurion]

Ahaha, that's Ninty's spiffy new Mario emblem, Bloodworth...

(That specific pic is from that big financial report that's floating around...)  

[Ages]

That would be quite the badass cookie.  I wanna make one now!

[animecyberrat]

ok just becaus eages says what you want to hear but I LOOKED UP THE FACTS.

READ gamefaqs they have a comparison chart tahts breask down whats each system can do.


Also WHy compare Vectorman to DCK, Genesis had way better 3D games than thay.


Also I already kmentions SNES HAD MOR COLORS< TAHSTW AS ALL IT HAD. Genesis DID have more sprites and nigher frame rates, take games like Sonic 2 split screan and see how much details they putin thier levels, or sonic 2 psecial stages for that matter, they had 3D GFX also, so did SOnic 3 and SPinball. Also look ast Sonic Spinball while yoru at it.



Then compare games made for BOTH SYSTEMS NOT EXLCUSIVES! Vectorman showed off what GENESIS had as far as SPRITES, it ahd some very impresseive BACKGORUND visuals and a lot more fluid animation than DKC, its wasnt emphasising the 3d aspect like DKC was, itw as showing how flat dkc was verses hwo fluid it was.


SNES WAS NOT leaps and bounds over Genesis it was MORE COLORFULL! tahst was ALL IT HAD.

Mode seven was nice but once Sega CD came out that was put to shame. ANd when I comapred Genesis to Saturn I specificxaly said with SEGA CD. Sega CD was supposed to be the complete genesis and was marketed thatw ay and performed that way.

I NEVER SAID NINTENDO WAS WORSE TAHN SEGA SO WTF!


IF I had blatanlty said things untrue I would accept yrou reply but EVRYTHING IS SAID I LOOKED UP AND ARE FACTS.




ANd Atari Jaguar had a motorola 68000 chip in it, which MOST developrs admitted to programing for due to familiarity, tahst teh EXACT SAME CHIP IN GENESIS> PLay a Jaguar copy of ANY GAMES thatw a ALSO on Genesis and you'll see what i am talking,a nd it WAS a 64 bit system many devs who worked on it even said it was. Do some research. It had 64 bit processors and 64 bit system bus, but it ALSO had 16 and 32 bit chips which got used more ioften due to FAMILIARITY, it WAS Ataris stupidity, adn they paid dearly for it.


When you comeback with FACTS not Nintendo fanboyism we will talk. otherwise shut up.

[darknight06]

"When you comeback with FACTS not Nintendo fanboyism we will talk. otherwise shut up."

Those were actually facts, you're the one that can't let your Sega Fanboyism go.  And another thing, what's with all the negativity? Just because someone says anything about your beloved Sega doesn't mean you need to blow up in someone's face over it.  Damn, I've never defended ANY company as much as you seem to.

[Ian Sane]

People say graphics don't matter but the Rev is an odd situation.  Yeah the NES had worse graphics then the SMS and the Genesis had worst graphics than the SNES and the PSX had worse graphics than the N64 and it didn't matter in the end.  Fair enough but it's not the same issue.  The NES had inferior graphics because it came out BEFORE the SMS.  This applies to all those consoles.  At the time they were released they had cutting edge graphics that blew everyone away.  The Rev is an odd situation where it will launch with inferior hardware after a "better" console has come out, in this case the X360.  That's never happened to my knowledge.  People expect the newest console to have the best graphics and the Rev might suffer for not providing that.

[JonLeung]

It's not about graphics, it never was, it's all about the library of games.

[Ages]

Animecybercat...Chill out!  There must be some validity to what I said or someone else wouldnt agree with me.  What makes you think my facts are wrong and yours are right?  Galford was also going to rip your post, does that mean that he'd be lying as well?  And if so, why does everyone want to pick on poor poor Animecybercat anyways?  Because he doesnt use spell check?  Alas, you've spewed more nonsense, which I must fix.

"Also WHy compare Vectorman to DCK, Genesis had way better 3D games than thay"

The sole purpose of Vectorman was to show that the Genesis could make a game in the same style of DKC.  The 3D rendering process on a 2D sprite had not been done before, and it was something that Nintendo was tauting as an exclusive feature.  That game singlehandedly held off the PSX long enough for the N64 to be released.  Sega didn't want to be outdone so Vectorman was created to showcase the same graphical style.  Also, what games did the Genesis have that were 3D?  You cite the bonus stages in Sonic 2 and Sonic 3, yet they were not 3D at all.  If you knew what you were talking about, they were 2D models rendered on a moving 2D plane.  3D games required the use of polygons moving in a 3D space, which I never saw on the Genesis (note, I said GENESIS, not Genesis + 32X, or Genesis + Sega CD).  

"Also I already kmentions SNES HAD MOR COLORS< TAHSTW AS ALL IT HAD. Genesis DID have more sprites and nigher frame rates, take games like Sonic 2 split screan and see how much details they putin thier levels, or sonic 2 psecial stages for that matter, they had 3D GFX also, so did SOnic 3 and SPinball. Also look ast Sonic Spinball while yoru at it."

You say that more colors are all the SNES had, when that is infact not true.  The SNES sound card was more advanced than the Genesis.  Go back and listen to the music in Donkey Kong or Super Metroid if you want to argue that fact.  You state more colors are all the SNES had, yet they mattered the most.  What's the point of having the fanciest paper in the world if you dont have the paint to color your ideas?  I love Sega, but games like Ecco the Dolphin showed that they tried to hide subpar gameplay behind spiffy graphics (this does not mean all Sega games, just a few ie: Ecco the Dolphin & Sonic Spinball).

"Then compare games made for BOTH SYSTEMS NOT EXLCUSIVES! Vectorman showed off what GENESIS had as far as SPRITES, it ahd some very impresseive BACKGORUND visuals and a lot more fluid animation than DKC, its wasnt emphasising the 3d aspect like DKC was, itw as showing how flat dkc was verses hwo fluid it was. "

You just cited exclusive games for the Genesis, now you say compare games that werent exclusives?  Which one is it?  This is yet, another hole in your argument.  If you want to compare nonexclusives, alright, look at the Mega Man game on the Genesis, vs. The SNES ones.  Or we could look at Street Fighter on each system (where the SNES had enough buttons to replicate the arcade experience).  Fluidity vs. Flatness?  Where'd you come up with this argument?  If Vectorman was attempting to show how much more smoothly it could move than DKC, why were the graphics in the same style?  And wouldn't it make more sense to make a fighting game show how fluid a game could be rather than a platformer?  (Oh wait, they did...it was called Virtua Fighter)

"Mode seven was nice but once Sega CD came out that was put to shame. ANd when I comapred Genesis to Saturn I specificxaly said with SEGA CD. Sega CD was supposed to be the complete genesis and was marketed thatw ay and performed that way."

You seem to keep forgetting a little fact.  Mode Seven was a technique used by developers to make the games look better.  It cost the consumer nothing more than they paid for the system itself.  The Sega CD on the other hand, cost the consumer $150.  And if it "completed" the Genesis as you state, what do you make of the 32X?  Also, why the hell did Sega release a half finished system in the first place?  You argue a point using a more sophisticated product that came out years after Nintendo had released the SNES and say it put it to shame...Newer tech is obviously going to make old tech look worse.

"I NEVER SAID NINTENDO WAS WORSE TAHN SEGA SO WTF!"

You don't have to yell...When did I say that you said Nintendo was worse than Sega?  You made it clear in your post that the Genesis was more technologically advanced than the SNES.  That was your argument, and that's what I've been replying to.  Are you really that defensive that you cannot see that?

"ANd Atari Jaguar had a motorola 68000 chip in it, which MOST developrs admitted to programing for due to familiarity, tahst teh EXACT SAME CHIP IN GENESIS> PLay a Jaguar copy of ANY GAMES thatw a ALSO on Genesis and you'll see what i am talking,a nd it WAS a 64 bit system many devs who worked on it even said it was. Do some research. It had 64 bit processors and 64 bit system bus, but it ALSO had 16 and 32 bit chips which got used more ioften due to FAMILIARITY, it WAS Ataris stupidity, adn they paid dearly for it."

The Jaguar had many chips in it.  Maybe developers did program for one out of the many to choose from.  I'm not arguing that fact.  Here's an exerpt from Wikipedia.com: "The bit width of the Jaguar is still a source of considerable debate today, but consensus exists among those who are familiar with the system hardware that, because Jaguar's main data bus and some of the processors are 64-bit, the entire system can be considered 64 bit. It would otherwise be considered a 32-bit console" .

I dont know why you said my argument was Nintendo fanboyism.  As I mentioned earlier, I own a Genesis.  I own an SNES.  I love Nintendo yes, but Sega was a close second.  I cannot find any fanboyism in there outside of the remark about "blast-processing."  You need to lighten up, this is nothing to get so bent out of shape about.  If you're wrong, YOU'RE WRONG.  I could be wrong about a bit of the Jaguar mess, but that doesnt invalidate my whole arguement.  I'd advise you to shut up, think before you type, and for god's sake, use spell check once in a while.

[ThePerm]

snes could do more sprites on the screen at once too.

[animecyberrat]

Before we go further I am going to say that I am ONLY makign these points because alot of these things are being debated rigth ow in the PS3 verses Rev and I am showing how even in the past every system bascicaly played to thier strengths.



I was only making a piont that GRAPHCIS have never sold a system and was using many expamles from the past, then YOU attacked me first.

I already mentioned the SNES had better sound chip didnt you read that, but GRAPHCIALY all it had was mroe colores, the GENESIS DID have more sprites and higher resolution. That was the point i was making, yet you didnt read any of that at all.  I can provide facts


______________________________________________________________________________
|          | Neo Geo  |   SNES   | Genesis  |   TG-16  |    NES   | Sega MS2 |
|----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|Bits (CPU)|   8 + 16 |       16 |       16 |    8 + 8 |        8 |        8 |
|Bits (Gx) |       16 |       16 |       16 |       16 |        8 |        8 |
|CPU       |     68000|    65816 |    68000 |   HuC6280|     6502 |      Z80 |
|APU (Aud) |       Z80|  SPC? |      Z80 |          |          |          |
|MHz       |   12.5, 4|      3.6 |      7.6 |  3.6  3.6|      1.8 |      3.6 |
|Graphics  | 320 x 224| 256 x 224| 320 x 224| 256 x 256| 256 x 240| 240 x 226|
| -2nd mode|          | 512 x 448|320 x 448*| 320x256**|          |          |
|Planes    |        3 |        ? |        2 |        1 |        1 |        1 |
|Colors    |4096/65536| 256/32768|   61/512 |  482/512 |    16/52 |   52/256 |
|Sprites   |      380 |      128 |       80 |       64 |        8 |       16 |
| - size   |  16 x 512|   32 x 32|   32 x 32|   16 x 16|    8 x 8 |    8 x 8 |
|Audio     |   15-lyr |PCM 8-lyr |   10-lyr |    6-lyr |     mono |     mono |
|RAM       | 64K+68Kgx|128K+64Kgx| 72K+64Kgx|  8K+64Kgx|  2K+ 2Kgx|        ? |
|          | (+2K Z80)|          |          |          |          |          |
|----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|CD CPU/MHz|        ? |          |68000/12.5| 65802/16 |
|CD RAM    |430K VRAM |          |     768K |  CD= 64K |
|          | 64K SRAM |          |          | SCD=256K |
|          |7 mg DRAM |          |          | ACD= 2MB |
|----------+----------+          +----------+----------+



That is a break down  of the systems specs. compared to others at the time.

Now Yo brought up Street Fighter II, I will tell you I have both games for both systems now I can provide linsk to screenshots but Im sure yu can google search on yoruown and see that tehy are IDENTICAL on almsot every aspect but upon closer examination yo will see the GENESIS version always had faster animations, smother frame rate, and more animated characters sprites, teh SNES versions also looked good dont get me wrong, but tehyonly ADVANTAGE they had GRAPHICALY was the colors. SSF2Turbo was also the FIRST SNES game to fully utilise all those colors.


Before that not very many SNES games were that noticably more colorfull. considering that teh hardware that they used the aracade was most of the time the same hardware Sega used as it was generica chip set, SNES had CUSTOM chip, modified from the normal chip. The only thing MOde 7 offered was scaling and rotatio0n of the sprites, Genesis had this also but it wasnt used as much nor was it ever refered to as s aspecific feature of the system but it did have multiple plane and could rotate sprites just as easily as SNES, see Sonic Spinball for example.

I am not a SEGA FANBOY EITHER. I started out playing Nintendo games long before Sega was an option.

Also SMS only came out a year after NES and it was basicaly same hardware but it had improved sprites and more colors.  The differences between NES and SMS were not as noticable as NES to SNES but certain games did show the changes.



I do not have the time to go back and dig up the detailed specs of PS verses N64 verses Satrun, we can all see that clearly N64 was better and more powerful, I never argued with that, and even though itw as true YES teh Saturn proicessors were harder to program for and most developers didnt fully utilize it properly a detaild comparison of tech specs, and a direct comparison of games that were on BOTH systems will clearly show that Satrun did in fact have better polygon graphics.  It had a higher polly count and had more ram and better Video chips to fully cokpliment the sytem, what it lacked that PS had was VIDEO CODECS built in, PS had an easier time hadnling FMVs than Satrun and all the PS games that LOOKED better 3D wise were ONLY FMV sequences. The rare Saturn games that  SEGA made thta fully showed off what it could do clearly had superior GRX than PSx.



However I was one of the many peopel who werent impressed by the graphics and was turned off mostly by the games, or lack of games really.

When it comes to PS3 verses REV the point I have been making, is that people do not need to worry if the GFX arent as impressive because I GAURANTEE they will 1 be good enough you wont care, and 2 that if the games are good nobody will care.


THATS is what I have been showing, OK Ill admit I may have come about it the wrong way i was TRYING to be optimistic about the rev and MY INTENTION was originaly to offer some hope to those hear who continue to make it an issue.



and WHY THE HELL SHOUDL I CALM DOWN! All I was doing was trying to get peopel optimistic about teh NINTENDO REVOLUTION and you guys somehow missinterperted thats wrongly, and I NEVER EVER said SNES had BAD GFX or worse than Genesis just that for the most part SNES major advantage wa the colors and some hoe I am Sega fanboy? I shoudlnt have called any one Nintendo fanboy ok I admit it I try not to do that but it seams all I ever get around here IS attacked. No matter WHAT point I am making.


I tried to be calm and reason with peopel, because I have always been a fair and objetionable person when it comes to video games, yet for some reason if you tell someone someting they dont liek they all of a sudden have to get pissed off and argue, you ONLY disafree about the Genesis, not directed at ages but the otehrs, BECAUSE you preferd teh SNES over it, I never took sides, i bought both i still have both. and I have games ON both and can atest that for THE MOST PART Genesis did have higher frame rates, more detailed graphics and definatley faster and smoother animations. and I also want to re emphasise that I DID mention teh Genesis had inferior sound chip, of course Sony made teh SNES chip and Sega used the same chip they had usewd as main proscessor for SMS, that was actualy a patern of thiers for a while Genesis main chip was Satruns sound chip.


I have always been and always will bea  fan of BOTH companies and I take offense when a Nintendo ONLY or SEGA Only person bashes the other side for stupid reasons, goto Sega.com forums and read my posts there DEFENDING Nintendo to Sega fanboys. You can find me uder the name Segagamer12

I have alwasy taken offense when someonbe form eitehr side has to insult someone who lieks the otehr, I hate it when Nintendo fans bash Sega for no real rason, say "I didnt like Sega games becaus eto me they were fun"  NOT I didnt liek Sega games because Sonic is dumb and everything not made by Nintendo bites."



Same way for Sega fans, dont tell me you hate Nintendo czu their I LOVE HALO 2, and Segas not, cuz Sonic sure as hell wont win you that arunment. Say yo dont liek Mario or whatever it is for whatever reason but not because youd have to be stupid for liking it.




i HATE pokemon, there I said it, but I dont go aroudn telling people its dumb i justs ay hey it never appealed to me.

But when  person tells me I am dumb for liking Sonic cuz hes crap and their only resposne is Nintendo didnt make it so there, yewah I take offense.



TRY and read my entire post before replying I dont want an argument that wont die just try and get teh POINT I was making, cuz when you replied yo made it sound like I was BASHING Nintendo and proclaiming Sega when i WAS NOT. i was stating facts and I provided those facts, which in case of Jaguar you provide teh same links and we both said the same thing in different words.

[Bloodworth]

Am I the only that thinks framerates in 2D have little or nothing to do with the processor?  Isn't it just a matter of frames drawn by the developers?  

Also, doesn't the chart you posted even show that the SNES could handle more sprites?

Quote
Sprites SNES 128 | Genesis 80

 
Several other stats on that list show higher numbers for the SNES too, not just the colors.

Anyways, what it comes down to is that you're stating as fact things that some of the more technically minded know to be untrue.  Plus, you are emotionally overreacting to some pretty calm and logical arguments, acting like you're being attacked by fanboys.  You do need to calm down.

[Galford]

To Bloodworth,
Yeah I still post, just real life now intrudes much more then it use to.  
I see you're still here too.  Weren't you always content editor?

To animecyberrat, were not trying to bash you, but on some forums what you said would have unleashed a flame war...

The only component on the Genesis that is more powerful then it's SNES component is it's 68k based CPU.
It was much faster then the 65813(I think it's called that) based CPU.  The only other thing the Genesis has going for it was it's sound setup was slightly easier to get results out of.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

and ultimately didn't stack up to SNES' audio offerings.

[Ages]

I dont know why you had to turn what I said into an attack, I'm just citing facts that you missed.  Criticism isnt a bad thing, in fact, its the only way anyone ever improves.  So instead of yelling at me, saying I'm taking your phrases out of context, learn from what I say.  I'm not trying to hurt you.

"I was only making a piont that GRAPHCIS have never sold a system and was using many expamles from the past, then YOU attacked me first."

That's where you messed up, as I said in the first post, graphics mattered in the early to mid 90's as people wanted as close to an arcade experience as possible.  This was a big deal you refuse to aknowledge.  If it wasnt, Neo Geo wouldn't have felt it was worth the risk to release their ARCADE PERFECT home system, no matter the cost to the consumer.

"Now Yo brought up Street Fighter II, I will tell you I have both games for both systems now I can provide linsk to screenshots but Im sure yu can google search on yoruown and see that tehy are IDENTICAL on almsot every aspect but upon closer examination yo will see the GENESIS version always had faster animations, smother frame rate, and more animated characters sprites, teh SNES versions also looked good dont get me wrong, but tehyonly ADVANTAGE they had GRAPHICALY was the colors. SSF2Turbo was also the FIRST SNES game to fully utilise all those colors."

I chose Street Fighter because it was one of the few games that was ported between both systems I could think of off the top of my head.  You tell me to look at the screens, then say that I will SEE the Genesis version had faster animations and the like.  This is impossible to do outside of seeing a video, so your statement is moot.  Super Contra > Sega's Contra, no if's and's or but's about that.

"I do not have the time to go back and dig up the detailed specs of PS verses N64 verses Satrun, we can all see that clearly N64 was better and more powerful, I never argued with that, and even though itw as true YES teh Saturn proicessors were harder to program for and most developers didnt fully utilize it properly a detaild comparison of tech specs, and a direct comparison of games that were on BOTH systems will clearly show that Satrun did in fact have better polygon graphics. It had a higher polly count and had more ram and better Video chips to fully cokpliment the sytem, what it lacked that PS had was VIDEO CODECS built in, PS had an easier time hadnling FMVs than Satrun and all the PS games that LOOKED better 3D wise were ONLY FMV sequences. The rare Saturn games that SEGA made thta fully showed off what it could do clearly had superior GRX than PSx"

Could you pull up some screens to prove this point?  I cant really think of many Saturn games off hand that had also been released on the PSX.  The PSX had better 3D, if you want to dispute this fact, look at the best looking Saturn game compared to Gran Turismo 2.  You can argue all you want in tech speak, it doesnt matter.  What matters is the product displayed on the screen.

"When it comes to PS3 verses REV the point I have been making, is that people do not need to worry if the GFX arent as impressive because I GAURANTEE they will 1 be good enough you wont care, and 2 that if the games are good nobody will care"
We can ASSUME the graphics will be good enough, but you cannot make that guarenttee.  Ian Sane brought up the most important fact in this thread.  The Rev's graphics are rumored to be less than that of an older system.  Something that is seemingly inexcusible in typical technologial ideals.

"and WHY THE HELL SHOUDL I CALM DOWN! All I was doing was trying to get peopel optimistic about teh NINTENDO REVOLUTION and you guys somehow missinterperted thats wrongly, and I NEVER EVER said SNES had BAD GFX or worse than Genesis just that for the most part SNES major advantage wa the colors and some hoe I am Sega fanboy? I shoudlnt have called any one Nintendo fanboy ok I admit it I try not to do that but it seams all I ever get around here IS attacked. No matter WHAT point I am making."

You should calm down because it's not that big a deal.  We're all (sans Ian Sane) optimistic about the Rev.  You state that the Genesis outshined the SNES in every aspect except color...Isn't that saying that the SNES graphics are worse than that of the Genesis?  

[ThePerm]

tomb raider and resident evil had  been  released on  saturn  and  psx..they didnt look  much different.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I've played both Street Fighter ports.  The Genesis version's colors seemed....OFF?  And the music and sound FX really sound... flattened?  The SNES version's audio in many cases OUTDID the arcade version's, since many of the sounds were re-recorded and the music re-sequenced to fit the SNES sound specs -- the music really stands out well in this case.

Then I could bring up Mortal Kombat 1... SNES had colorful HUGE sprites; at a quick glance it could pass off for the arcade version save for its resolution.  The Genesis version... "weak" sound sampling returns.  Then there's the unusually small sprites and the lack of color (lots of... grey skin... blue this, blue that), and of course the missing background layers.  Just didn't seem right.

~~~~~

Oh yeah, lots of Capcom games made to Saturn, including the Mega Man sequels of the time.

[darknight06]

""Now Yo brought up Street Fighter II, I will tell you I have both games for both systems now I can provide linsk to screenshots but Im sure yu can google search on yoruown and see that tehy are IDENTICAL on almsot every aspect but upon closer examination yo will see the GENESIS version always had faster animations, smother frame rate, and more animated characters sprites, teh SNES versions also looked good dont get me wrong, but tehyonly ADVANTAGE they had GRAPHICALY was the colors. SSF2Turbo was also the FIRST SNES game to fully utilise all those colors."

Ok, WHAT THE CRAP IS THIS?!  The Genesis version wishes it had anything on the SNES one.  The ONLY animations that it had extra was on the countdown, PC version of the arcade intro, and some backgrounds animations, (the latter two the SNES got later with SSF2) no doubt due to the fact the Genesis was crap for sound and they really didn't have to worry about doing quality digital samples.  And I'm quite sure the lower color graphics had a say in that too. They had the room to spare.  Other than that, it was WAY worse in color and FAR inferior in sound, two places that back then people CARED about bigtime back then with the comparisons.  

Now concerning which version of SUPER Street Fighter 2 was better that was SNES no contest.  Genesis did have a SLIGHTLY more animated intro (neither version got it 100 right), but everywhere else it was absolute garbage.  All of the gameplay issues that SF2T had on SNES because it used the World Warrior engine got completely ironed out.  The SNES version was actually critically acclaimed back then for having music that actually sounded VERY close to the CPS2 original, and it also had the projectile sound effects.  Genesis version fared FAR worse in comparison.  Even more missing background elements, animation cuts in the backgrounds, and music and sound that was even WORSE than SF2SCE.  So they added the option to fight all 16 characters, big deal, didn't help when the SNES version looked and sounded like CPS2 in comparison.  

[Ages]

There.  A page dedicated to comparing SNES games to Genesis.  There's you're proof, and it's quite interesting as well.

[wandering]

He seems kind of biased.....

Quote
One instance of a game being highly publicized for being completely original is StarFox, which came out in 1993 on the Snes. It was a good game with an excellent soundtrack, but StarFox was not the first polygon based console game as people might think, thanks to the multi page spreads in many popular gaming mags describing the game as such. Hard Drivin’, Race Drivin’, F15 Strike Eagle and several other Microprose simulators had all been out on the Genesis in 1992 and 1993. Moreover, they all ran straight off the Genesis hardware, rather than a special on cartridge chip like StarFox’s SFX chip. Gameplay wise, StarFox might as well have been Galaxy Force 3 with cute animal pilots, because it is virtually identical to Sega’s Galaxy Force II from way back in 89’. I liked StarFox quite a bit, and am an Argonaut fan to this day, but the arcade version of Galaxy Force II, which included a moving cockpit and great graphics and sound, simply has no comparison.

[animecyberrat]

wow, I see where it did get out of hand, maybe I was getting off and I thought I expolained that but oh well I guess I did get over excited, but I do tend to do that.



Ok I will give yo PS over Saturn just becaus eyou would have to compare exclusives like Daytona USA or Panzer Dragoon series to get any real indicator. But Wipeout and BAttle Arean Toshindedn were also on both systems and Saturn looked better I thought.


Saturns flaws laid in its desgin, it was too hard to program for therefore very few games got it right, but those that did, which took  forever to develop and came out too late in its life, did in fact show up the PS.

SNES I always DID see as graphicaly betetr until i started comparing them one on one, and I already vistied that site and thast where a lot of my comparisons came from, except I apparently got siwtched on the Street FIghter games, thast my mistake I admit, I play teh Genesis versions way more and Its for me anyways because of the controlers are better, the 6 button arcade pad and the genesis 8way d pad were, and thast not an argument its truth, better for fighting games. So since I spend more time playing them on Genesis I got cought up in they were betetr. YES ok they SNES did get better over time for Street FIghter, and MK, thast not fair, because Acclaim didnt even try to make Genesis games look good, they were flat out trying to make it look badm they aditted this latter on, oter acclaim games liek Maximum Carnage  and NBA Jam actualy looked pretty close on both systems and agian it was slight idfferences.



MY mistake was saying Genesis had betetr graphics, were I was only trying to show that tehre were close enough to each other taht gaphics were an issue.



YES I remember the arcade debate also, and yor rigth most peole did want and arcae perfect experince, I was one of them thats one of the reaons why I was very happy with Genesis, its had more arcade games, mostly Sega made but they were the King of the Arcades, still are actually.



But I was not trying to say that SNES was bad or worse than Genesis just that it wasnt things liek graphics that made peopel choise one over the other, after I got a SNES I did go back and get a lot of the exclusibes that was all I really needed it for,a nd I bougth all 4 MK games made on it as well as Genesis to see which was betetr and for the most part SNES just had colors and sound advatanges, I always played the Genesis for MK 1 and UMK3 and played SNES for 2 and 3 because Genesis was faster for ombos for UMK3 and had all the right stuff in 1 tahst SNES was misisng.


For me it wasnt about grax except in MK2s case because MK II on Genesis did look bad, but MK 3 didnt, so again it was Acclaims fault NOT the hardware, Willimas proved that by Getting MK 3 and UMK3 looking identical on both systems. and your riogth I re-read your posts and you miogth not have been attacking me I shouldnt have jumpd on you, I just been getting attacked alot, in other areas, and tehre fore have been on defensive these past few days.  

[couchmonkey]

Super NES vs. Genesis, have I stepped in a time-warp?  By the end of the PSX/N64 era, all the years of fighting over which console was the most powerful convinced me that it doesn't really matter, and the differences are usually not big enough to worry about.  It's all about the games, and Nintendo will always have the best of those in my opinion.

[Ian Sane]

Man I can't believe we're having a SNES/Genesis fight.

The SNES had better graphics and sound capabilities.  That's just factual and you can't do anything about that.  The Genesis was however faster.  I think it had more RAM.  I remember reading that Nintendo skimped on the RAM to cut the costs down and the infamous SNES slowdown was a result.  But the SNES came out years after the Genesis so it's no knock on the Genesis that it had better hardware in most areas and extra effects built-in.  I think if anything it's a knock against Nintendo that the SNES had slowdown problems.

Both systems had an incredibly impressive library of games and I would probably consider them the two best consoles ever made.  They benefited from the fact that the two of them were consistently close to each other in market share so they both were forced to compete aggressively because neither could afford to rest on their laurels.  A lot of people complain that games today aren't as good as they were then.  I think the main reason for that is because we've never had such a close race since.  Last gen Sony had such a huge lead that they didn't really have to try.

[animecyberrat]

man i guess what brought it out was all the talk about Sega mamking games for VC and someone mentioned that it woudl be liek SNES VS Genesis all over again, and I got carried away.



BUt heres one for ya to think about, even back then SNES came out almost 3 years AFTER Genesis,a nd it was ONLY slightly better, graphicaly tehre were too close most of the time, colors not withstanding Genesis still had comparable sprite and animation capabilities.


So agian the point was even though Nintendo came out after, they still ddint make thier system so much more powerfull that Genesis died because of it, and thats were I was trying to get to also. Even with Rev its coming out a yaer latter than its competitor and now its going to be weeker, so on that note its going to be interesting to see how it plays out for Nintendo, but I remain optimistic because every generation the leader has not always been the more powerfull system. Also I dont know about any of you guys but N64 was good enough for me and everytime it gets better its just more good and nothing bad as far as I am concerned.