Super NES or Sega Genesis?

[celerystalker]

Yep. It's an old thread that's quite active and that a lot of people are talking in, and I'm certainly not the only one who mentioned the Turbo. Since a good chunk recently surrounded shooters, well, that's probably where it's most relevant, and has become a bigger part of the retro market posthumously. I don't see what's wrong about being positive about an inclusive view of 16 bit gaming.

I still think SNES is the best and most relevant of all, and the secondary market seems to agree. SNES picture and sound quality without system modification are the clearest, and Genesis is the muddiest using stock cables regardless of resolution capabilities. The SNES library contains an excellent array of Capcom arcade ports, polished first party Nintendo releases, and many more high quality releases from Konami, even though I prefer Contra: Hard Corps to Contra III. SNES has a much larger import selection to explore.

The RPG/shooter/sports thing has been done to death, largely because it holds water, and system capabilities mean almost nothing when comparing dead systems. What you can actually play on these systems is all that matters anymore. Everyone should try to play all of them if they really love old games. Like what you want. Encourage other people to try new things so you can share the experience. This sort of thread is a great opportunity to tell each other about the quirky games that stole our young hearts to compare systems instead of beating the Sonic vs Mario debate of 1992 over the head or comparing lackluster tech demos to show who failed less at what they sucked at.

I was just hoping to hear more about what made people really love their favorite, and a great way to increase others' understanding of your point of view is to include new-to-them games that might hit where the obvious classics didn't. I would never have gotten so into Genesis without a friend turning me on to some less-mentioned co-op games like Gain Ground, ToeJam and Earl, CrackDown, Alien Storm, General Chaos,etc. That same friend got into his SNES after trying less talked about games like Magic Sword, Run Saber, King of Dragons, Sonic Blastman 2, Brawl Brothers, King Arthur's World, Stone Protectors, and FireStriker. While it didn't make me forsake my favorite console, those experiences playing different games with friends gave me new memories and a different nostalgia I wouldn't have had without expanding the conversation.

[MidnightRider]

I like the Genesis better, regardless of who agrees, but you're not going to see discussion of lesser known titles for any of them in this particular thread. All a thread like this does is reignite the old argument.

Now, I personally am not against anyone preferring the SNES, or TurboGrafx, or whatever. It's when fanboys try to make it sound like the SNES is unquestionably, objectively, the best, that I get irritated. Mainly because there is no objectivity to be had.

Specs come in because the SNES fanboy makes sweeping generalizations that the SNES is better. That makes the Genesis fanboy actually do some research in retaliation, because the SNES fanboy is just stating something, without knowing what the consoles actually are capable of.

Then there's the software libraries. The SNES' is supposedly better because Nintendo and their 3rd parties franchised more than Sega and theirs did? That's the only way anyone can rationalize that thought, unless they still choose to remain completely ignorant of what the Genesis actually has for games, while still commenting on threads like this. People have complained about a lack of innovation in the industry, and yet years later turn it around that the one company that did almost nothing but innovate is supposed to be inferior to the company that still milks the same cows to this day(yeah Sega still milks Sonic, but at least it's the 1 series). Then the same people 180 again over Madden and Call of Duty, like those are doing anything different from Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc.





I shouldn't care that the nerdiest invention going cares more for the console that has the most games based off the concepts started by Dungeons and Dragons, but I end up doing so, because they can't voice their opinions without trying to make the other side sound beneath them. That makes me turn toward the fanboy side, because of the kind of people that have been making ignorant sweeping comments all over forums like this, as well as the average Youtuber, against Sega, all in the name of making Nintendo come off looking better, just because that's what they had 20 years ago.

I share the same sentiments that you do, that anyone with a true passion for this hobby should be able to enjoy it all, and yet I still see people say they won't ever pick up console/handheld x, or one made by company z, to this day.





Btw, if you want to talk about relevance, what has the SNES exactly done to shape the industry moving forward?

With the Genesis, Sega:
-Opened up the competitive market.
-Created a rating system that eventually became the ESRB.
-Got most of the European market to look at home consoles in place of microcomputers for gaming.
-Had the first online services that actually allowed people to download and play games.
-Brought western development back to home consoles in a much grander capacity than the NES.

Probably more I can't think of off the top of my head, but I don't think a home console gets much, if any, more relevant than what I already listed.

[Steven]

I obviously prefer the SNES myself (heh, after all, I've been running a SNES-dedicated fansite for nearly 8 years now). That's not to suggest I loathe the Genesis or anything. I had both systems as a kid in the early-mid '90s, enjoyed both but was always more of a SNES guy. This continues to this day. Lot of AAA classics but also a lot of playable, solid games that not many talk about that much that you could get lost in for a weekend or two. It's discovering these lesser known games that makes it so rewarding and fun.

[celerystalker]

You'd have to be crazy to think the SNES was more innovative than the Genesis. Sega has always been more forward thinking. Probably too much. The SNES most lasting impact aside from a legacy of quality games was controller design with its diamond face buttons and shoulder buttons that have been incorporated into most controllers that followed. Sega was the vanguard for trying new ideas, for sure.

Innovation in accessories doesn't make me like the game library any better, though, and playing games is what gives these things personal relevance to my experience. Historical significance and personal are definitively different, and I'm coming from a personal stance to state why I like a system best.

As far as franchising goes, every game company does it as much as they can get away with. How many Golden Axes were on Genesis? Streets of Rage? Thunderforce? Valis? Shining? Phantasy Star? Sega was especially then not at all above trying to franchise their properties, and third parties made the effort, too. In Europe, ports of Amiga franchises like Turrican and Shadow of the Beast are part of what brought relevance culturally. Sega has just always been better at creating than managing their properties, but they tried. Nintendo has been less innovative, but has always displayed better business sense.

For third parties, though, yeah, both consoles had a ton of franchise action. The SNES ones just came from more successful companies. Technosoft went after the Genesis hard. Capcom favored the SNES. Konami favored the SNES. EAwent after the Genesis with tons of Amiga and PC ports and franchises. Renovation was Genesis crazy with Wolf Team. Square and Enix pumped their games into the SNES. Everyone tried to franchise and make money on both systems. The SNES games that get so much more recognition aren't just a result of marketing. Sega ran the most TV ads of any console maker at the time. The Sega scream, blast processing, and Nintendon't are more iconic than any campaign Nintendo ran.

It's not a matter of research or being uninformed about third parties. SNES resonated with a different crowd, and posthumously, a bigger one.

[JoshDragon]

Since I owned a Super Nintendo as a kid, I would say that one was better. The Genesis was marketed to an older crowd.

[MidnightRider]

Where were most of those post-Genesis though? They didn't try bringing Streets of Rage or Phantasy Star to the next generation. Instead they made Panzer Dragoon, and Nights into Dreams. N64 still had the same properties from the SNES, which came from the NES before it. That's what I was talking about.

You really think that has no relevance to how these consoles are viewed across the internet now?

[celerystalker]

Sega tried to bring back Streets of Rage several times, and kept cancelling it. They did include it as a pack-in with the Sega CD and slapped it on a bunch of compilations. Golden Axe had an additional arcade sequel, a Saturn fighter, a last Gen game based on Tyris, a PS2 remake, and Game Gear spinoff. Phantasy Star Online and Zero perpetuated the franchise. Sega Superstars Tennis? Sega All Stars racing? Shinobi Legions on Saturn, the PS2 reboot and spinoff Nightshade? Shining Wisdom, the Holy Ark, Shining Force CD, III, the Sword of Hajya, Shining Tears, and Shining Force Neo? How about the whole 3D Ages line and the Genesis compilations and plug and plays that flooded the market? That's without touching Sonic or Sega Sports. Sega pushes their old brands as hard as anyone. Hell, they even tried to reboot Vectorman and Rent a Hero, and Space Harrier...

[MidnightRider]

They still weren't there throughout all the generations of Sega consoles, and then as a 3rd party developer for other consoles, and even the 3rd party titles from the Genesis that you brought up didn't keep going.

Still, I highly doubt most(if any) exclaiming the SNES has a better library are doing so due to their extensive knowledge of Musya, Whirlo, and Hagane, while being equally knowledgeable about Ranger X, Herzog Zwei, and Alien Soldier.

As I said, I don't mind that anyone has a preference for the SNES, I just wish there were more Steven's about it, and less of what is generally seen.

[celerystalker]

Wait, so ThunderForce V and VI didn't happen? Contra isn't still around? Castlevania died? The third parties did go on. In fact, Capcom loved the Saturn and loaded it with arcade ports. If anything, the N64 and GameCube had terrible 3rd party support. In fact, new IPs defined that generation when Sony got into the picture.

I don't see how appearing specifically on every console is relevant for franchising. Metroid skipped 8 years and a generation between games. Kid Icarus had one NA exclusive Game Boy sequel before the 3DS, but still is venerated as a classic. Earthbound has a rabid following based on what, marketing and sequels? Nintendo has two franchises that have appeared each generation: Mario and Zelda. Sega certainly pumped out just as much Sonic in that time, and I can't see how ignoring all the Sega first party sequels I mentioned in my last post makes them somehow irrelevant in branding. Nintendo has never pushed re-releases and compilations as hard as Sega until recent portable remakes.

Isn't it just possible that the SNES has a lot of games that stayed relevant to new generations because they weren't so tied to a date or era? Comix Zone was neat, but have you looked at Sketch Turner or listened to the promo CD it came with lately? Streets of Rage plays like a boss, but did anyone have a more cringeworthy design than Skate? Genesis went so hard on being current and in the moment that it might not speak to a kid born after 1995. Well, that kid's now an adult with an opinion, and they lack historical context to find a lot of these old designs anything but amusingly retro, whereas ActRaiser and those "games based on Dungeons and Dragons" don't rely as much on context.

Seriously, though, the only game you listed that I don't own and haven't played extensively is Whirlo, and that was never released in NA. Last I checked I was criticized for talking non-stock, non-NA games, but that's not the point. I absolutely agree that the extended libraries are what this conversation should be about. You told me that wasn't possible in a thread like this. Why not? No one ever convinced anyone that a console was worth playing after its death by quoting specs and capabilities, or by showing who had the less horrid 3D racers. I was convinced that the Genesis could be fun for me by a friend willing to show me some games I hadn't tried yet. It's up to us to keep an open mind and talk about those offbeat ganes if we want to spread the love for our systems of choice. However, just as you get sick of SNES fans going on about Mario, Zelda, and RPGs, I get sick of Genesis fanboys assuming I'm uneducated because I don't think it's the better console. I'm okay with agreeing to disagree and people being entitled to their opinions. I'm not okay with being told I don't get it or that I'm a fanboy because I don't agree. I just really enjoy talking games, and I would love to see people offer games to try to each other so we can see why we all get passionate about this stuff.

Edit: Also, I agree. Steven is awesome. I love RVGfanatic. Great stories!

[MidnightRider]

Obviously their games are still going(aside from some of the major ones nowadays), but you never listed anything by Konami or Capcom, who weren't exclusive, despite any favoritism shown.

Alien Soldier wasn't NA either, so that was 1 for 1 in that case. I didn't say foreign regions don't count, but when you talk about something like the various genres of gaming on the whole, you have to take into account what's accessible. How does a console having more of a genre exclusive to Japan matter to the average person buying games, unless they're in Japan? Not everyone is willing to import. Emulation may be a thing now, but I think of the collectors on this issue as well.

You're saying character design/setting are important to relevance? So no one should like old TV shows/movies in a what-was-then modern setting, as opposed to what's current, or what was fantasy, or sci-fi? So Back to the Future isn't relevant because of what Michael J. Fox was wearing when he was depicting Marty McFly, or how it's set in the '80's and goes to a '50's setting?; or does it remain relevant only because of the sci-fi time travel aspect?

I'm not sick of SNES fanboys talking about the same games(but it is very noticeable, like they don't know what they have on their own console), I'm sick of them putting down the Genesis to try to make the SNES look better.

[Steven]

As I said, I don't mind that anyone has a preference for the SNES, I just wish there were more Steven's about it, and less of what is generally seen.


Also, I agree. Steven is awesome. I love RVGfanatic. Great stories!

Thank you, guys. I feel like bowing a couple times and saying "domo arigato" with each bow, haha :p

Yeah, I never got the whole "I'm gonna trash a system so I can point out how awesome this other system is" sort of talk. It's unnecessary as the whole hobby is extremely subjective. If for example you get your rocks off on the Virtual Boy, by all means, keep on keeping on. I think every system offers something unique, and there's no need to get all defensive when it comes to this stuff. You like what you like, but it's nice when you have a little class about it, too, and can accept other POVs that don't necessarily align 100% with yours.

[celerystalker]

Yeah, I'm good with respectful disagreement, and I'm glad we can discuss topics like this here without it degenerating to insults.

As far as design affecting relevance, yes, I do think it does. That's not to say it makes a game irrelevant due to outdated appearances. Streets of Rage has badly outdated character designs, and I love it. What I believe it does affect, though, is a game's accessibility to younger audiences. In an age where a huge chunk of young people barely distinguish between playing a game and watching a let's play video, games turn into memes and don't always get the credit they deserve. Sega has taken a lot of flip-flopping from journalists about design of characters like Skate or Fighting Vipers characters long after the fact even though they were well received at the time.

What I was trying to get across is that by using consistent design based more on fantasy than modern trends, many of Nintendo properties have one more thing going for them when retroactively attracting new players. Internet memes and bad journalism have caused games like the CD-i Zeldas to be looked at as abominations when they are in fact quite playable and even fun. Skate from Streets of Rage jumps out at me because I've seen him cited as a major criticism in modern retro reviews, when at the time it wasn't really a topic of conversation. I'm not saying Nintendo's designs are better as much ad I'm saying they're easily digested.

I wasn't even really thinking about emulation. I've never done it, but I guess to younger players who aren't collecters that would add yet another wrinkle. It's those younger players that really turn the online discussion on its ear, as they begin adding their opinions to all sides with a completely different perspective. Most of us who lived through this time are set in our ways, but hopefully have learned to appreciate everything that's out there. I know that for me, opening up my mind to new condoles after being a Nintendo die hard as a kid allowed people to teach me about awesome stuff I hadn't heard about. I bought in on the Genesis eventually and learned to respect it, and that's one of the things that led me to importing and exploring other systems' libraries as well.

[genesisguy]

I like the Genesis better, regardless of who agrees, but you're not going to see discussion of lesser known titles for any of them in this particular thread. All a thread like this does is reignite the old argument.

Now, I personally am not against anyone preferring the SNES, or TurboGrafx, or whatever. It's when fanboys try to make it sound like the SNES is unquestionably, objectively, the best, that I get irritated. Mainly because there is no objectivity to be had.

Specs come in because the SNES fanboy makes sweeping generalizations that the SNES is better. That makes the Genesis fanboy actually do some research in retaliation, because the SNES fanboy is just stating something, without knowing what the consoles actually are capable of.

Then there's the software libraries. The SNES' is supposedly better because Nintendo and their 3rd parties franchised more than Sega and theirs did? That's the only way anyone can rationalize that thought, unless they still choose to remain completely ignorant of what the Genesis actually has for games, while still commenting on threads like this. People have complained about a lack of innovation in the industry, and yet years later turn it around that the one company that did almost nothing but innovate is supposed to be inferior to the company that still milks the same cows to this day(yeah Sega still milks Sonic, but at least it's the 1 series). Then the same people 180 again over Madden and Call of Duty, like those are doing anything different from Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc.





I shouldn't care that the nerdiest invention going cares more for the console that has the most games based off the concepts started by Dungeons and Dragons, but I end up doing so, because they can't voice their opinions without trying to make the other side sound beneath them. That makes me turn toward the fanboy side, because of the kind of people that have been making ignorant sweeping comments all over forums like this, as well as the average Youtuber, against Sega, all in the name of making Nintendo come off looking better, just because that's what they had 20 years ago.

I share the same sentiments that you do, that anyone with a true passion for this hobby should be able to enjoy it all, and yet I still see people say they won't ever pick up console/handheld x, or one made by company z, to this day.





Btw, if you want to talk about relevance, what has the SNES exactly done to shape the industry moving forward?

With the Genesis, Sega:
-Opened up the competitive market.
-Created a rating system that eventually became the ESRB.
-Got most of the European market to look at home consoles in place of microcomputers for gaming.
-Had the first online services that actually allowed people to download and play games.
-Brought western development back to home consoles in a much grander capacity than the NES.

Probably more I can't think of off the top of my head, but I don't think a home console gets much, if any, more relevant than what I already listed.

Dang! This is such a good post if we were all sitting around at a bar I'd be buying you beer all night. As a guy who has always preferred the Genesis I have to say EVERY one of your points here is 100% my experience when dealing with SNES fanboys. You nailed it man! :rocker:

[Tanooki]

Can we debate Genesis fanboys too getting riled up over that systems perceived shortcomings? :) Throwing around fanboy in this thread kind of can harm credibility since that console war died nearly 20 years ago. :D

[Gentlegamer]

I wish Genesis fans could be like TurboGrafx fans and chill out.