How popular is the Genesis these days?

[treismac]

I wonder what kind of market there is for the Genesis these days, as I never see the system selling for much. Just today at the same pawn shop that had a NES selling for $100 and a SNES for $85, there sat a [model 1] Genesis for $19.99. I'm fairly certain that I've seen the Genesis selling for $20 elsewhere too, although those prices for the first two Nintendo systems are probably the highest I've run across. While I'm sure the hardcore Sega fans will never forsake Sega's most popular and successful system, is the rest of the retro community "done" with the system? From what I hear the SNES is kind of in vogue at the moment. Shouldn't that spike some sort of interest in its rival? According to this article (http://www.ign.com/articles/2009/03/20/genesis-vs-snes-by-the-numbers) the Genesis sold 29 million units to the SNES' 49.1 million. While not quite neck and neck, the Genesis didn't do too shabby. You'd think that the respective interest in the systems would come close to mirroring the sales.

Any thoughts on the matter?

[sloan]

False perceptions and radical fanboyism have driven SNES through the roof while Genesis has been frowned upon by many hipster collectors. I like it though, as it generally means that Genesis games can be had at cheaper prices. Of course, there are exceptions with more rare titles, but most Genesis games can be had for lesser prices than comparable SNES games.

[The Adventurer]

Doesn't Sega actually license an official clone console? Not to mention is pretty good about compilation rereleases. Maybe the original hardware and software just isn't in demand for those reasons?

[Koa Zo]

The Genesis is roughly 62.4% less popular these days than it should be.

[treismac]

... Genesis has been frowned upon by many hipster collectors.

I know that no member of a subculture or adherent of an ideology is 100% consistent with their creed/beliefs, but I thought eschewing mainstream stuff was a big part of the hipster bag. Shouldn't the Genesis be right up their alley?

[The Adventurer]

Hipsters liked Turbographx 16 before it was cool.

[Tupin]

Aren't there only a few truly rare Genesis games? I know of only a few. That might cause a lack of discussion about games.

[Greg2600]

I don't think it's a hipster thing at all. More to do with the fact that Nintendo was massive before the SNES and afterwards, with franchises continuing to this day. SEGA is basically dead as of 2001, in terms of new content. Everything since is derivative. SEGA's CD, 32x, Saturn, and Dreamcast were retail failures. But it's really all about the system you grew up with. By 1994, most kids were getting a SNES not a Genesis, so those who are now grown up are going to want the SNES. In terms of demand, the SNES franchises are more well known because many saw subsequent titles. The SNES has a stronger library, of both highly-acclaimed and collector-sought after games. There are SEGA fanboys for sure, but they're all old enough to have dived back into collecting already. There won't be anyone new, just the die-hards who collect most anything. Like me, I never had a Colecovision, though I played it back in the day a couple times. Yet I have one and many games and accessories.

[IrishNinja]

False perceptions and radical fanboyism have driven SNES through the roof while Genesis has been frowned upon by many hipster collectors. I like it though, as it generally means that Genesis games can be had at cheaper prices. Of course, there are exceptions with more rare titles, but most Genesis games can be had for lesser prices than comparable SNES games.


The Genesis is roughly 62.4% less popular these days than it should be.

i really liked these posts!


Aren't there only a few truly rare Genesis games? I know of only a few. That might cause a lack of discussion about games.

ehh on the very high end you have stuff like MUSHA, Crusader of Centy, Mega Man: Wily Wars, Snatcher, etc but while these guys were right - Saturn aside, the sega scenes are largely not seeing the terrible retro bubble SNES stuff is, thankfully - a few titles have in fact jumped up a bit. finding good condition loose copies of Moonwalker, Ghostbusters, Contra: Hard Corps, Castlevania Bloodlines etc for less than $40 was tricky last year when replacing those titles, and godforbid you want CIB it could be a bit higher. fortunately, the clamshells caused more kids like myself to take care of said titles so they're not nearly as hard off as CIB SNES stuff right now.

[Koa Zo]

The clamshell cases are one of the points which win the Genesis and Mega Drive favor in my view as a collector.
Particularly, the artwork on some of the Mega Drive clamshells is fantastic.

[wiggyx]

I don't think it's a hipster thing at all. More to do with the fact that Nintendo was massive before the SNES and afterwards, with franchises continuing to this day. SEGA is basically dead as of 2001, in terms of new content. Everything since is derivative. SEGA's CD, 32x, Saturn, and Dreamcast were retail failures. But it's really all about the system you grew up with. By 1994, most kids were getting a SNES not a Genesis, so those who are now grown up are going to want the SNES. In terms of demand, the SNES franchises are more well known because many saw subsequent titles. The SNES has a stronger library, of both highly-acclaimed and collector-sought after games. There are SEGA fanboys for sure, but they're all old enough to have dived back into collecting already. There won't be anyone new, just the die-hards who collect most anything. Like me, I never had a Colecovision, though I played it back in the day a couple times. Yet I have one and many games and accessories.

I'm with this guy.

From my standpoint, I've always been more of a Nintendo guy. I've been collecting since the mid-80's and I've always favored SNES over Genesis. I just like the games for SNES far more than the Genesis, and clearly I'm not the only one, based on the market value of classic games.

[MidnightRider]

For starters, that article in the first post is off by 11 million. The Genesis sold roughly 40 million worldwide. Taking that into account, 14 of Nintendo's 49 million was from Japan alone.

They were equally popular during the time, otherwise this would never have been, or continue to be, an argument in the first place.

There's a lot on the Genesis that would appeal to people, if they would open their minds and look into it, but if people want to be suckers for brand loyalty, it's not my concern.

[StealthLurker]

Western SEGA Genesis games may not be valuable, but a lot more people seem to be on the import JPN Megadrive bandwagon. Lots of titles that used to only go for $200 seemed to have jumped up and consistently sold for $400-$500 now.


.

[Graham Mitchell]

False perceptions and radical fanboyism have driven SNES through the roof while Genesis has been frowned upon by many hipster collectors. I like it though, as it generally means that Genesis games can be had at cheaper prices. Of course, there are exceptions with more rare titles, but most Genesis games can be had for lesser prices than comparable SNES games.

While it may not be the ONLY reason, I do agree that this is true and I see it a lot, especially living in L.A. Sega stuff in general doesn't get the same amount of love. That's fine. It makes the more rare titles easier to get.

[Tanooki]

It's popular, just a shadow of Nintendo in popularity is all, but it's their own fault entirely. eBay has always been the great barometer of popularity I have seen with games, just see what they sell for. Sega back in the 90s had a huge one hit wonder with the Genesis, but they burned many fans and a lot of bridges with the 32X, SCD and even the Saturn. High priced items, little quality or little output(32X) for it and people got screwed. Peoples memories even if they're not sharp, they remember feelings easier and I think that plays well into popularity and less people just care for Sega. Compound the issue the existing company does a lot of dumb stuff and is a sad shell of itself that also produces no hardware, and the situation just is what it is. If you stayed a Sega fan or found you do like their stuff you buy it, but far fewer do and the prices reflect it versus Nintendo stuff. It is a good thing though, you can get a lot of nice stuff and not pay that much because you don't have resellers in mass trying to rape your wallet.

[The Adventurer]

Sega back in the 90s had a huge one hit wonder with the Genesis,

I think a lot of people forget this fact. The Genesis, while a solid system with a great library, was so successful because it was released during the life span of the NES. The graphics bump was enough to put it on the map in terms of sales. The SNES, which came a few years latter would be a technically more impressive machine, and Sega would never again lead in console dominance.

The Genesis's success is almost entirely tied to its timing of release.

[sloan]

While it may not be the ONLY reason, I do agree that this is true and I see it a lot, especially living in L.A. Sega stuff in general doesn't get the same amount of love. That's fine. It makes the more rare titles easier to get.

I back it up with personal experience. My niece and her boyfriend are both in their twenties and look and identify with the hipster scene. I had them over to my home for Christmas. He was amazed at the size of my collection, but primarily was fascinated with my NES and SNES stuff. I asked him about any interest in Genesis and his countenance immediately changed. No way, no day. His hipster gaming friends were all into retro, but it was solely the big 'N' and nothing else as far as they were concerned. Their loss.

[bigbacon]

Plus Nintendo stuff is in the spot light with NWC showing up on pawn stars and Stadium events making the evening news and print news. This draws everyone and their grandmother to because either they think it will be worth something OR it is the cool thing to get into (hipsters)

Least in the states, I also always assume Sega wasn't as big because of the near monopoly of Nintendo during the NES days.

Is Sega sort of regional in the states as well? Growing up, I didn't know a single person who had a sega product other than one kid who had a game gear. Everyone was nintendo. Those later on that got a Genesis, never went past the core system and ended up with a SNES afterwards anyway.

I didn't even knew the Saturn existed until a few years ago.

[Bojay1997]

I think a lot of people forget this fact. The Genesis, while a solid system with a great library, was so successful because it was released during the life span of the NES. The graphics bump was enough to put it on the map in terms of sales. The SNES, which came a few years latter would be a technically more impressive machine, and Sega would never again lead in console dominance.

The Genesis's success is almost entirely tied to its timing of release.

This just isn't accurate at all. You don't sell tens of millions of consoles based solely on a graphics bump and timing. The Genesis also had an outstanding library of games with many arcade ports and sports titles early on which is why a lot of us bought one at the time. The NES also didn't sell particularly well in Europe and frankly, the Megadrive outsold the SNES there despite its technical edge. At the end of the day, the SNES ended up with a more impressive overall library IMHO, but the Genesis has a pretty outstanding library as well.

[Koa Zo]

Lots of titles that used to only go for $200 seemed to have jumped up and consistently sold for $400-$500 now.


What games are those? I can think of maybe two or three that command over the $200 range. Battle Mania 2, and Eliminate Down, and maybe Rockman Mega World.

[sloan]

I think a lot of people forget this fact. The Genesis, while a solid system with a great library, was so successful because it was released during the life span of the NES. The graphics bump was enough to put it on the map in terms of sales. The SNES, which came a few years latter would be a technically more impressive machine, and Sega would never again lead in console dominance.

The Genesis's success is almost entirely tied to its timing of release.

Revisionist history?

Did the Dreamcast not dominate the console race through the year 2000?

[Bojay1997]

Revisionist history?

Did the Dreamcast not dominate the console race through the year 2000?

It did not. In fact, it was outsold by the N64 and Playstation One until the price cut just after the PS2 launch and only beat the unit sales on the PS2 initially because of a severe supply shortage.

[tom]

Sega does what Nintendon't.....classic that

[MarioMania]

I hope we don't have a flame war on here, What's better SNES or the Genesis

I like both system, Sonic on the Genesis and Mario on the SNES

Blame all the damn Nintendo Fanboy's on the Internet

[Bloodreign]

What games are those? I can think of maybe two or three that command over the $200 range. Battle Mania 2, and Eliminate Down, and maybe Rockman Mega World.

You forgot one, Snow Bros., last I checked that one was priced insanely.

Genesis will always be in vogue for me, over 160 games strong in my collection, and always looking for more. My SNES on the other hand, thanks to prices, stands a little over 130 or so.

[The Adventurer]

Sega does what Nintendon't.....classic that


More like Nintendoes what Segan't!

...

Ok, doesn't really work... ;););)

[wiggyx]

This just isn't accurate at all. You don't sell tens of millions of consoles based solely on a graphics bump and timing. The Genesis also had an outstanding library of games with many arcade ports and sports titles early on which is why a lot of us bought one at the time. The NES also didn't sell particularly well in Europe and frankly, the Megadrive outsold the SNES there despite its technical edge. At the end of the day, the SNES ended up with a more impressive overall library IMHO, but the Genesis has a pretty outstanding library as well.

In the late 80's and early 90's the graphics improvement over the NES was everything. Back then that was essentially the number one selling point; how close the graphics were to "arcade quality". So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.

[BricatSegaFan]

What games are those? I can think of maybe two or three that command over the $200 range. Battle Mania 2, and Eliminate Down, and maybe Rockman Mega World.

Gleylancer maybe and verytex

[IrishNinja]

wow, i totally do not agree with Sega-CD and especially Saturn "lacking quality", there's a lotta greats & classics to be found, especially on Saturn. we can talk all day about the wrong moves they made marketing things, but there's way too many broad/wrong statements here.


I think a lot of people forget this fact. The Genesis, while a solid system with a great library, was so successful because it was released during the life span of the NES. The graphics bump was enough to put it on the map in terms of sales. The SNES, which came a few years latter would be a technically more impressive machine, and Sega would never again lead in console dominance.

The Genesis's success is almost entirely tied to its timing of release.

this is entirely factually incorrect; SNES was out a mere 2 years into the Genesis' cycle (1991) and '92/93 Sega enjoyed a larger marketshare, thanks the popularity of Sonic, sports titles & a host of hardcore entries too (arcade, beat-em-ups, fighters, SHMUPs etc). Sega starting falling off hard around '94 because while Genesis was getting long in the tooth, they were splitting their house too much supporting Game Gear, Sega-CD, 32x and Saturn development (and release in Japan). ports on SNES in later years tended to look/sound better but that's not a given for every title either; you have to define exactly what you mean by "technically more impressive" because the SNES' CPU held it back but not in a way that many who played the most common games noticed (JRPGs, platformers etc). Kalinske, then head of SOA tried telling SOJ that the 16-bit gen had a few more years in it, but when the rushed Saturn bombed over here, SOJ pulled the plug on all the other systems to focus on that one, and SNES basically had the market to itself & proceeded to eat many newcomers' lunch with stuff like DKC, mario RPG etc into the mid-90's.

the SNES was a great system with a fantastic library, but there's no need to revise history for it here.


This just isn't accurate at all. You don't sell tens of millions of consoles based solely on a graphics bump and timing. The Genesis also had an outstanding library of games with many arcade ports and sports titles early on which is why a lot of us bought one at the time. The NES also didn't sell particularly well in Europe and frankly, the Megadrive outsold the SNES there despite its technical edge. At the end of the day, the SNES ended up with a more impressive overall library IMHO, but the Genesis has a pretty outstanding library as well.

also this.


I hope we don't have a flame war on here, What's better SNES or the Genesis

I like both system, Sonic on the Genesis and Mario on the SNES

Blame all the damn Nintendo Fanboy's on the Internet

me too, but agreed; when retrospectives are done i tend to think the history is painted rather one-sided.


In the late 80's and early 90's the graphics improvement over the NES was everything. Back then that was essentially the number one selling point; how close the graphics were to "arcade quality". So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.

ugh, this is also severely under painting the breadth of titles/genres the Genesis saw. even arcade style stuff like Strider, Streets of Rage, or run-n-gun like Rolling Thunder 2 fit your criteria on length, but make up for it with challenge as they're meant to be replayed/mastered, no idea why that's a negative here but if you want to pretend they were all like a rushed launch title...okay, i guess?

[homerhomer]

I think the Genesis is still popular. Just this last year for Christmas, I noticed an 80s games SOC unit at a local store. I think this verifies that the Genesis still has a lot of fans out there. The issue I see with Sega is there brand doesn't mean anything anymore. Back in the day Sega was king for Arcade and people would get excited about having a piece of that at home. In today's world Sega means new Sonic game every two years.

[Koa Zo]

ugh, this is also severely under painting the breadth of titles/genres the Genesis saw. even arcade style stuff like Strider, Streets of Rage, or run-n-gun like Rolling Thunder 2 fit your criteria on length, but make up for it with challenge as they're meant to be replayed/mastered, no idea why that's a negative here but if you want to pretend they were all like a rushed launch title...okay, i guess?
Yeah his referencing Altered Beast, which was a "free" pack-in game, is entirely narrow sighted.
My early library consisted on Herzog Zwei, Populous, Thunder Force III, Phantasy Star II, Revenge of Shinobi, Ghouls And Ghosts, and a few others like Mystic Defender, Castle of Illusion....
tell me you're beating them in 20 minutes and there's no replay value...

So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.
What?



Gleylancer maybe and verytex
and Slap Fight, and Crusader of Centy, and Snow Bros, and Panorama Cotton.
The original comment suggested there are "lots of" Mega Drive games "consistently selling" in the $400-500 range.
That isn't happening.

[o.pwuaioc]

What?
C'mon, Altered Beast does suck, though that doesn't take away from the awesomeness of many other titles that came out for it, even in the early days. The SNES might have beat it in the end, back when it failed to get a Saturn launch and late-gen games were making a splash on the SNES, but the Genesis was highly loved in my neighborhood for most of my childhood.

[Bojay1997]

In the late 80's and early 90's the graphics improvement over the NES was everything. Back then that was essentially the number one selling point; how close the graphics were to "arcade quality". So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.

It was a selling point, but it certainly wasn't the only selling point. If it was, the TG-16 should have been a major success against the NES in the US and the 3do should have outsold the Genesis and SNES. There were tons of PC and Amiga games ported in some fashion to the Genesis. Those games included complex ones like Star Control, Starflight, Populous, Powermonger, the Immortal, etc...as well as tons of Psygnosis games. Both the SNES and the Genesis had their share of throw away garbage games, but the Genesis had a library that was just as strong as the SNES for most of that particular console generation.

[Koa Zo]

C'mon, Altered Beast does suck
I didnt dispute that nor sugest otherwise.
Wiggy said " So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached"
That's just bullshit. Sure, if you want to be ignorant of all the other games I guess you can say that.

[kupomogli]

For lacking in third party support because of reasons everyone knows and I don't really have to explain, the Genesis was an amazing system and had a ton of great exclusives.

They really screwed up with their multiple add ons for the Genesis though and then after they launched the Saturn, the Playstation was the hot item and got a large amount of third party support. Dreamcast was the final nail in the coffin with how easy it was to pirate games and everyone wanted the PS2 after the PSX.

Maybe if the Sega CD and 32X weren't Genesis add ons and either one or the other was their own console that released in 1992, then they would have got more support and things would have turned out different. The Sega CD was great for its time, it was just ignored by gamers and developers alike because it was an add on. If it was its own console in 1992, then it would probably have had the graphics quality of the 32X did as an add on in 1994. With atleast three years, Sega would have had a good run until they Playstation came out and they could have released the Saturn after the Playstation and possibly get more support because of the quality of the prior console.

Maybe in an alternate universe, Sega has better management and made smarter decisions.

[MarioMania]

There's alot of good games for the Genesis

Sonic Series
Streets of Rage Trilogy
Vectorman & Vectorman 2
Gaiares
TMNT: The Hyperstone Heist
Truxton
Virtua Racing
Mega Bomberman
Virtua Fighter 2
Ms. Pac-Man
OutRun

That's mosty in my collection

[SuperEliteGamer]

What games are those? I can think of maybe two or three that command over the $200 range. Battle Mania 2, and Eliminate Down, and maybe Rockman Mega World.

Those are awesome!
And it's a pity that MD isn't that popular,but i love it's library.
Yeah,ok,it wasn't as good as the SNES',but still.

[Atarileaf]

I love the Genesis, definitely my favorite of 16-bit generation.

[Peonpiate]

I don't think it's a hipster thing at all. More to do with the fact that Nintendo was massive before the SNES and afterwards, with franchises continuing to this day. SEGA is basically dead as of 2001, in terms of new content. Everything since is derivative. SEGA's CD, 32x, Saturn, and Dreamcast were retail failures. But it's really all about the system you grew up with. By 1994, most kids were getting a SNES not a Genesis, so those who are now grown up are going to want the SNES. In terms of demand, the SNES franchises are more well known because many saw subsequent titles. The SNES has a stronger library, of both highly-acclaimed and collector-sought after games. There are SEGA fanboys for sure, but they're all old enough to have dived back into collecting already. There won't be anyone new, just the die-hards who collect most anything. Like me, I never had a Colecovision, though I played it back in the day a couple times. Yet I have one and many games and accessories.


Thats pretty spot on. Dont forget that the AAA series Sega used to have, have been stomped into the mud countless times now with bad games. Sonic as a series cant hold a candle to Mario these days, let alone Zelda or Metroid. A new Sonic game will probably suck whereas Mario [almost always] will be a great product, so the chances of a new gamer playing a new Sonic title and wanting to play the old titles is pretty nil [imo].

[bigbacon]

Maybe when Nintendo stuff gets so outrageously expensive, people will turn to old Sega stuff and find out that it is just an awesome as the Nintendo side of things.

[wiggyx]

I didnt dispute that nor sugest otherwise.
Wiggy said " So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached"
That's just bullshit. Sure, if you want to be ignorant of all the other games I guess you can say that.

How am I ignorant exactly?

I never said there weren't good games, only that so many early titles were really weak in terms of gameplay, with a lot of effort having gone into making games that looked really good, especially when compared to the NES and most anything else (hardware-wise) that came before.

Sega people are always so damned defensive. I like the Genesis, I love the Dreamcast, and I adore the Saturn. I even really liked the Master System for a long time, but its smallish library pushed me over to the NES.

Super Mario World is one of the best games ever IMO, and it was "just a pack-in." That's not an excuse for a game to be weak.

[Greg2600]

I think the Genesis is still popular. Just this last year for Christmas, I noticed an 80s games SOC unit at a local store. I think this verifies that the Genesis still has a lot of fans out there. The issue I see with Sega is there brand doesn't mean anything anymore. Back in the day Sega was king for Arcade and people would get excited about having a piece of that at home. In today's world Sega means new Sonic game every two years.

Well the OP was wondering if popularity was the reason for the far lower prices/demand on Genesis items vs. say Super Nintendo. I think many in this thread have proven that, as I would agree, that the Genesis was extremely popular 20 years ago. Is it still popular now? My feeling is no, not like SNES. SNES, as I said, partly due to Nintendo fandom, and partly due to the longer life the system and Nintendo properties in general have had, simply has more and younger fans. Like Atari 2600, that fandom has flat-lined. Whoever "gets into collecting" 2600 games is simply doing so to collect multiple systems hardcore. That person was too young to have likely ever owned a 2600. Genesis will soon be categorized this way I think.

The Super Famicom destroyed the Mega Drive in Japan, 4 to 1, while the Genesis edged the SNES in North America over a shorter life cycle. So here the Genesis was more popular. In Japan no way, and as a result far more obscure yet in demand Japanese designed titles exist for SNES. Someone mentioned higher prices for Capcom/Konami Genesis titles like Contra or Castlevania or such. Well those were franchises made famous on Nintendo, and likely are in demand by Nintendo-leaning gamers. So even the most in demand Genesis games are by Nintendo collectors! Ha ha.

The libraries are important though. You may have the occasional weird one like Moonwalker that goes up in value, but there are no Earthbound's, Chrono Trigger's, or Super Mario RPG's on the Genesis. In fact, RPG's, which tend to be very low quantity/high demand, reigned supreme on Super Nintendo. Some of the most popular games on Genesis for me and my friends were Sonic, Streets of Rage, Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, and anything by EA Sports. Well Sonic games are incredibly common like Super Mario, but Sonic is a flat-lined character unlike Mario who keeps on trucking. Not to mention that the Mario games have IMO much more replay value. The fighting and EA Sports games are a dime a dozen these days, they're worthless.

[Koa Zo]

How am I ignorant exactly?

I never said there weren't good games, only that so many early titles were really weak in terms of gameplay, with a lot of effort having gone into making games that looked really good

Your statements are unsubstantiated and misleading.


So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.
"So many of the games were terrible" - there, you are making things up. You give no indication of being factually aware of the early Genesis library so it wasn't a stretch to assume that you are ignorant of what was actually being played by knowledgeable consumers.

I guessed you would be simple enough to reference Super Mario World in regard to Altered Beast.
Sonic the Hedgehog was the pack-in game when Super Mario World was on the market.
Keith Courage may have been a valid comparison to Altered Beast.

"Sega people are always so damned defensive"
really? calling someone out on their bullshit is being defensive?
Instead of your misleading generalities and made-up statements, how about some facts or concrete examples?

[IrishNinja]

Dreamcast piracy was no doubt a factor in their hopes of recouping on software sales (once selling hardware at a loss) but that happened well into its tragically short lifecycle as well, i think people tend to inflate that factor a bit


Thats pretty spot on. Dont forget that the AAA series Sega used to have, have been stomped into the mud countless times now with bad games. Sonic as a series cant hold a candle to Mario these days, let alone Zelda or Metroid. A new Sonic game will probably suck whereas Mario [almost always] will be a great product, so the chances of a new gamer playing a new Sonic title and wanting to play the old titles is pretty nil [imo].

which ones have been "stomped into the mud" exactly? the last few sonic games (Colors, Generations) have been fantastic, i still gotta play Lost World though, and both Racing kart games have been awesome. They also tend to sell quite well, except on the WU where most things sell like booty buttcheerks sadly.


How am I ignorant exactly?

I never said there weren't good games, only that so many early titles were really weak in terms of gameplay, with a lot of effort having gone into making games that looked really good, especially when compared to the NES and most anything else (hardware-wise) that came before.

the first wave of them sure - Space Harrier II, Monaco, Buster Douglas Boxing, Sword of Vermillion etc stressed larger pixels/characters to show the arcade experience, but that was in '89 and honestly most launch software does just that: tries to show system capabilities over good design because it's early on. i have no idea why you're stressing that as though it's a factor unique to the system, rather than nearly every other one (how many early SNES games just showed mode 7, or 32-bit titles just wanting to show 3-D polygons however messy, etc).


Super Mario World is one of the best games ever IMO, and it was "just a pack-in." That's not an excuse for a game to be weak.


You're still on about Altered Beast, a pack-in they had when nintendo illegaly blocked them from 3rd party licenses. By '91 when most people bought in, they had Sonic...let's not act like it stayed that way, or anyone's heralding that game as a classic. it was a short title meant to show the closing gap with arcade ports, which were in high demand back then.

[o.pwuaioc]

His statements aren't really that much of a stretch.

The US launch line-up:

Altered Beast - bad
Last Battle - terrible
Space Harrier II - ok
Super Thunder Blade - (haven't played)
Thunder Force II - not bad
Tommy Lasorda Baseball - sports, so, meh

SNES launch:

Super Mario World
F-Zero
Pilotwings
Gradius III
SimCity

TurboGrafx-16 launch:

Alien Crush
China Warrior
Dungeon Explorer
Keith Courage in Alpha Zones
Power Golf
R-Type
The Legendary Axe
Victory Run
Vigilante (video game)

Compared with the Turbografx and SNES launches, the Genesis launch was terrible. In fact, even without the comparison, it was still a pretty bad launch. Of my almost 40 Genesis games, only Ghouls 'n Ghosts and Thunder Force II date from 1989. In 1990, however, it really had some great hits.

[Koa Zo]

His statements aren't really that much of a stretch.

The US launch line-up:

The discussion wasn't about the launch line up. A generalized statement was made that that "So many of the games were terrible" (in fact, his context was "the late 80's and early 90's")
I listed the games which I was playing in the first year of owning a Genesis - all of which are pretty awesome. I made specific examples that there were plenty of games which offered more than 20-60 minutes of play.

Of course there were less than stellar games available, just like with any console.
The only example he suggested was Altered Beast. So if I reference Drakken, I can say "so many of the RPGs on SNES were terrible"? No that's just dumb

Also funny that he labels me "Sega person" because I call out bullshit.

[o.pwuaioc]

If you look at the context a little more closely, you'll see that they are talking about the early games in relation to the NES, that the Genesis sold well over the NES. They're talking about pre-SNES games. Even if he was technically wrong, no reason to get belligerent.

[calgon]

Ironically I said to myself just the other day that this year I want to start getting back into Genesis collecting.

[Koa Zo]

If you look at the context a little more closely, you'll see that they are talking about the early games in relation to the NES, that the Genesis sold well over the NES. They're talking about pre-SNES games. Even if he was technically wrong, no reason to get belligerent.

Funny that you're now looking "at the context a little more closely" after you made two erroneous posts that refuted or responded to things that weren't ever said nor implied.
No one suggested that Altered Beast wasn't a poor game, yet you posted to refute that. Then you make a post about launch titles that didn't apply to the discussion.

And now you paint me as belligerent because I've called someone out who is making things up and has no substantiation to their claims.

[wiggyx]

Your statements are unsubstantiated and misleading.

Space Harrier, Last Battle, Tommy Lasorda, Thunder Blade, Altered Beast, etc. All launch titles and all completely forgettable. Just because you misunderstood my point does NOT mean that what I said was misleading.


"So many of the games were terrible" - there, you are making things up. You give no indication of being factually aware of the early Genesis library so it wasn't a stretch to assume that you are ignorant of what was actually being played by knowledgeable consumers.

I'm not "making things up". No US launch title would make it onto a top top 100 list of Genesis games. They just aren't very good. Again, in case you missed it before, this isn't to say that there aren't good games for the console. You're sounding awfully butthurt for no reason.

And when you assume...


I guessed you would be simple enough to reference Super Mario World in regard to Altered Beast.
Sonic the Hedgehog was the pack-in game when Super Mario World was on the market.
Keith Courage may have been a valid comparison to Altered Beast.

LOL @ the comparison not being valid! It's a "simple" comparison. What did the Genesis come packed with at launch? What did the SNES come packed with at launch? If I play your game, then I can point to the likes of Zelda and Yoshi's Island eventually being packed-in with the SNES. Both games having FAR more depth and replay value than Sonic the 1-dimensional Hedgehog. Again, another game which doesn't offer much beyond about 60 minutes of running through every level as quickly as possible, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to NOT rush through the entire game.

"I'll just pick what I think is the best pack-in game and only allow it to be used for comparison's sake in this argument." -Koa Zo


"Sega people are always so damned defensive"
really? calling someone out on their bullshit is being defensive?
Instead of your misleading generalities and made-up statements, how about some facts or concrete examples?

Done, not that I need to prove anything to you.

The popularity of the SNES holds quite strong while that of the Genesis dwindles. This alone serves as fairly concrete evidence for my argument. Feel free to continue being butt-hurt though, as if I dealt some sort of personal insult. Like I said, that does seem to be the way of the Sega fanboy to be on the defense all the time.




The discussion wasn't about the launch line up. A generalized statement was made that that "So many of the games were terrible" (in fact, his context was "the late 80's and early 90's")
I listed the games which I was playing in the first year of owning a Genesis - all of which are pretty awesome. I made specific examples that there were plenty of games which offered more than 20-60 minutes of play.

Of course there were less than stellar games available, just like with any console.
The only example he suggested was Altered Beast. So if I reference Drakken, I can say "so many of the RPGs on SNES were terrible"? No that's just dumb

Also funny that he labels me "Sega person" because I call out bullshit.

Which one should understand to mean launch or early titles.

FYI, many of the games you listed wouldn't hold my attention for more than 60 minutes. Not in 1989, and most certainly not today. Shinobi is an arcade title, and as such, takes about 30 minutes to romp through. Populous never struck me as a stand-out console title. Plays well on PC, but for the Genesis and SNES, not so much. Mystic Defender is nearly identical to Shinobi in terms of being an arcade game. Your first time through may have taken 45-60 minutes, with no real reason to revisit it.

You can call it bullshit if you want, but my opinion (which is based on a LOT of experience with the console) is just that, my opinion. You don't have to agree. I bought my 1st Genesis within a week of launch and my SNES on launch day. I've played both a LOT over the years as well as the TG-16 and even my fair share of the Neo-Geo. Ignorrant I am not.

[BricatSegaFan]

I'm a Sega fan. I'm not butthurt but I generally prefer genesis and mega drive over snes and sfc. In fact I also prefer TG-16 and PCE a very close second. But that's because I'm a fan of shootem ups.

[Gameguy]

The Genesis is pretty much my favourite console but I'm not delusional. I agree that the launch games are pretty terrible overall. From what I remember reading the console didn't start to sell successfully until the pack-in game was changed to Sonic. I have no problems with the first Sonic though 2 and 3 are noticeably improved, I just won't accept that Sonic is a bad or boring game. At least it offers multiple playthroughs if you want to find all the Chaos Emeralds, I'm assuming most people won't complete the game the first time with everything. I'm not saying Sonic is better than Super Mario World, I'm just saying it's not a bad game. A Fanboy I am not.

The value of Genesis games has gone up from what I can personally see. I just don't come across the games or consoles as often as I used to, it's rare to see them at thrift stores anymore. What are we really comparing the value to? Just Nintendo consoles? Games are still selling for more than most PS1 or PS2 games, most Intellivision games, or most Atari games on most Atari consoles. If it's less popular today, it's because the company is basically not around anymore in a significant way, there's no more consoles in stores and most games produced by them aren't that good or exceptional. Most teenagers around today never grew up with a Sega console so they won't be looking into their previous ones, if you grew up with an N64 or Gamecube you'd be more likely to look into Nintendo's previous systems, those games are more on peoples' minds as those franchises are still around. This would affect the value of common but desirable games, not the rare games that collectors would go after.

[GhostDog]

The Genesis is an amazing system. Just imagine from 1989-1991 it was the main player of next generation systems before the SNES came out. The system gained a huge following from those years before the SNES took over the popularity contest and then the PS1/Saturn/N64 came into the mix. The Genesis was king of the hill for a handful of years before the SNES was able to take off and match the Genesis' success. Both are great systems and provided some good times.

[IrishNinja]

this is getting pretty silly


His statements aren't really that much of a stretch.

Compared with the Turbografx and SNES launches, the Genesis launch was terrible. In fact, even without the comparison, it was still a pretty bad launch. Of my almost 40 Genesis games, only Ghouls 'n Ghosts and Thunder Force II date from 1989. In 1990, however, it really had some great hits.

again: only that dude wanted to focus on the 1989 launch lineup of a system that was illegally locked out of 3rd party support. it went on until 1995 or so, but let's focus on a part of one year instead of the rest of the six because that paints a great talking point? it's inane; we might as well talk about how disappointing the NES, master system, N64 etc launch lineups were, because they have about as much to do with the topic at hand: the popularity of a system overall, when trying to move the goalposts to a six month window in the late 80's.


LOL @ the comparison not being valid! It's a "simple" comparison. What did the Genesis come packed with at launch? What did the SNES come packed with at launch? If I play your game, then I can point to the likes of Zelda and Yoshi's Island eventually being packed-in with the SNES. Both games having FAR more depth and replay value than Sonic the 1-dimensional Hedgehog. Again, another game which doesn't offer much beyond about 60 minutes of running through every level as quickly as possible, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to NOT rush through the entire game.

it's a shame you didn't play the game properly, then? levels had multiple ways of being explored/completed, as well as Sonic 2 and later pack-ins like Streets of Rage 1/2, the superior Aladdin title, etc but those didn't quite fit your narrative there.


"I'll just pick what I think is the best pack-in game and only allow it to be used for comparison's sake in this argument." -Koa Zo

this is literally the point you brought up & continue harping on for reasons i can't imagine, ironically.


The popularity of the SNES holds quite strong while that of the Genesis dwindles. This alone serves as fairly concrete evidence for my argument. Feel free to continue being butt-hurt though, as if I dealt some sort of personal insult. Like I said, that does seem to be the way of the Sega fanboy to be on the defense all the time.

the logical fallacy of ad poppulum, followed by homophobic ad homenim; well done.
what happened here was you spoke on something you don't seem to know about & comfortably painted it with a broad brush; when called on it, you got snippy/unnecessarily nasty. no one here has yet said your SNES didn't have absolute classics (and a better launch lineup, hands down!), but your statement on 60-minute games was something i'd expect of a person whose only experience with the gen/system came from wikipedia, and you don't seem to be that. you're welcome to correct me there but there's no need for insults or assumptions on the fantastic library the SNES provided - the fact that other scenes like Sega, NEC, Neo-Geo etc get slept on by various current retrospectives is indeed a larger topic worthy of discussion on another thread, but it's not in any way evident of quality, the way billboard rankings don't indicate the same.

you're absolutely right on SNES overall popularity though, if we're actually back on topic here. the retro bubble the SNES scene is currently seeing is insane, as far as inflating prices - even on mass-printed titles - but i guess i kinda get it for CIB titles since so few of us actually kept the boxes.


FYI, many of the games you listed wouldn't hold my attention for more than 60 minutes. Not in 1989, and most certainly not today. Shinobi is an arcade title, and as such, takes about 30 minutes to romp through. Populous never struck me as a stand-out console title. Plays well on PC, but for the Genesis and SNES, not so much. Mystic Defender is nearly identical to Shinobi in terms of being an arcade game. Your first time through may have taken 45-60 minutes, with no real reason to revisit it.

ehhh Shinobi only takes a bit longer than that when you've mastered it, which i wouldn't necessarily conflate with arcade by nature; you can breeze through mario games when you know what you're doing, but certainly not the first time through. the popularity of speedruns these days show that many a game can be finished quickly, i don't think that's a stirke against them. Shinobi also offers great gameplay, a fantastic soundtrack & big bosses worth revisiting; i take your points on Populus and prolly Mystic Defender too, but again we're talking about '89 (launch year) and not the next 5 years which is silly since SNES library was slow/small as fuck early on and like many great systems, most noteworthy titles showed up around halfway through its lifetime or so.


You can call it bullshit if you want, but my opinion (which is based on a LOT of experience with the console) is just that, my opinion. You don't have to agree. I bought my 1st Genesis within a week of launch and my SNES on launch day. I've played both a LOT over the years as well as the TG-16 and even my fair share of the Neo-Geo. Ignorrant I am not.

i mean, fair enough, but....how much did you play it in '93/94? many missed some of its absolute best like Crusader of Centy, Beyond Oasis, Contra Hard Crops, Castlevania Bloodlines, Dynamite Headdy, Punisher, Shadowrun, Shining Force II, etc.

[genesisguy]

ehhh Shinobi only takes a bit longer than that when you've mastered it, which i wouldn't necessarily conflate with arcade by nature; you can breeze through mario games when you know what you're doing, but certainly not the first time through. the popularity of speedruns these days show that many a game can be finished quickly, i don't think that's a stirke against them. Shinobi also offers great gameplay, a fantastic soundtrack & big bosses worth revisiting; i take your points on Populus and prolly Mystic Defender too, but again we're talking about '89 (launch year) and not the next 5 years which is silly since SNES library was slow/small as fuck early on and like many great systems, most noteworthy titles showed up around halfway through its lifetime or so.


IrishNinja, as I sit here drinking my coffee reading each of your responses I keep thinking you are more spot in with each one.
I agree with you 100 percent. There is absolutely no way Revenge of Shinobi is a 30 min game. Some of the posters at sega-16 had mentioned how Revenge of Shinobi was a bit of a Castlevaniaish game. I hadn't thought of it in that way so I played Super Castlevania 4 back to back with Revenge of Shinobi. So yes SC4 has more colors but I couldn't believe how easier Shinobi controlled. Certainly not a 30 min arcade game.

[genesisguy]

There is a youtube video called "Battle for Best SNES vs. Genesis" and it stars most of the youtube retro gaming community celebrities.
It's actually pretty poorly done as far as research conducted on the Genesis library. In many cases the hosts struggle to list Genesis games. If you sit through it you will soon realize that not one of those guys have a grasp on the depth of the Genesis library.

Sometimes I wonder if the influx of Nintendo circle jerks conducted by the youtube community has helped drive the Nintendo prices up.

[IrishNinja]

well..i mean, to play devil's advocate: even as a sega fan, i understand.

nintendo's absolute 8-bit domination/namebrand recognition/subsequent momentum rolled with them even through the rocky (but awesome) GC days, and as wiggyx said, not only are they making hardware over a decade after sega had to cease it, they've done what so very many japanese devs/pubs haven't: kept a good staple of recognizable franchises relevant throughout the years. i think psychologically it's natural to enjoy Mario 3D world and think back on how your first SM3, SMW, M64 etc playthrough felt...Sega put out a lot've great IP's last gen, but Sonic was one of the only ones recognizable from past eras, and even then design choices feel different in stuff like the recent Lost World, for much the same reason we don't see said other franchises: those creators have likely been gone for years, or what's left of those teams is on PC/other projects.

again, as a sega fan, this isn't even a new phenomenon though: since 2014 is Year of the Saturn (20th!), i've been diving through that amazing library that i largely missed in the day, and looking back, even in the mid-90's, SOJ decided to push new IP's like Panzer Dragoon, Burning Rangers, Virtua Fighter etc over Sonic, Streets of Rage and many of the others that western fans adored - sort've the exact opposite of what Nintendo's been doing in recent years, and when you look at the paltry few million (if that) units the Saturn got out the door over here, not only do i understand N's strategy there, i lament but also see why someone like wiggyx isn't namedropping those properties: they didn't have much exposure, and even when the dreamcast hit the ground running & hit nearly all the right notes, it was too late to even try to bring anything like them to a larger audience.

but yeah, i adore Retronauts (Parish & Kohler are great by me) and the like, but too many of the YT personalities seem to have only had one system each gen, but want to speak on the others all the same...again TG-16 & Neo Geo fans get it even worse, really. which i guess is fine for forum talk but if you're gonna address history & quality titles/hidden gems, you've really got no excuse nearly 2 decades later - you can emulate if nothing else! thankfully there's some dudes like Roo of 16-bit gems that seems virutally platform agnostic when digging through the crates.

[PC-ENGINE HELL]

I like the Snes and all just fine, but it never held that arcade look or feel that the Genesis and TG/PCE had, which is my meat and potatoes, arcade ports and arcade feeling gameplay. All systems have their strengths and weaknesses though in their line up of titles. Custom titles made for specifically for the Snes tended to be real gems, like Actraiser, Super Castlevania 4, Contra 3, Super Mario World, Chronotrigger, etc. If people want to favor the Snes more these days, cool, more power to them. Just makes getting stuff I want on the Genesis a lot easier and cheaper. In the end though, its not like you can go wrong with either system. The TG16/PCE, Snes, and Genesis all had tons of awesome games, so its not like there is not equal amounts of fun to be had on any given platform.

[Melf]

Space Harrier, Last Battle, Tommy Lasorda, Thunder Blade, Altered Beast, etc. All launch titles and all completely forgettable. Just because you misunderstood my point does NOT mean that what I said was misleading.

You did a poor job of making your point, then. Your original post was:


In the late 80's and early 90's the graphics improvement over the NES was everything. Back then that was essentially the number one selling point; how close the graphics were to "arcade quality". So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached (ahem, Altered Beast), but looked so cool, and the fact that one could finish the game in about 20 minutes with about zero reason to play through again didn't matter.

You make no mention of launch titles at all. In fact, given the context of your post, one could infer that your comment includes other titles released shortly after launch (which you neglect to mention) like Forgotten Worlds, Golden Axe, or Phantasy Star II.

Taken for what it is, this post still doesn't do a good job of making an argument. The Genesis was being marketed as "bringing the arcade experience home," so why wouldn't the games be arcadey? The last part is strictly subjective, and I'm assuming that you played NES games at the time, many of which were hardly much longer or filled with hours and hours of replay value. I don't see why this would be a problem, then. That was the nature of many games at the time, since they were designed to mimic the arcade experience.


I'm not "making things up". No US launch title would make it onto a top top 100 list of Genesis games. They just aren't very good. Again, subjective. I don't know what you would consider to be strictly a "launch" title, but how many people would consider the SNES port of Gradius III or China Warrior to be top 100 games? It all depends on opinion.


LOL @ the comparison not being valid! It's a "simple" comparison. What did the Genesis come packed with at launch? What did the SNES come packed with at launch? If I play your game, then I can point to the likes of Zelda and Yoshi's Island eventually being packed-in with the SNES. Both games having FAR more depth and replay value than Sonic the 1-dimensional Hedgehog. Again, another game which doesn't offer much beyond about 60 minutes of running through every level as quickly as possible, seeing as there's absolutely no reason to NOT rush through the entire game.

You just degraded your argument to "Nintendo rules! Sega sucks!" levels here. This has nothing to do with the argument. But since you fail to see any value in Altered Beast, let me give you some perspective. Altered Beast was never meant to be a "top 100" game. It was meant to show off the console's capabilities. That's why it was chosen as the pack-in title. Only 5 levels and beaten in 20 minutes! Yes, and it was damn close to the coin-op and FREE. It was meant to move hardware, and it did it's job quite capably.

In contrast, Super Mario World was triple A software. Why do you think Nintendo chose to pack in its most valuable title at launch? It needed to move hardware quickly, and it did. Sonic's inclusion was meant to do the same, and it did. Sega outsold Nintendo for the next 3 holiday seasons.

Say what you want about the games themselves, but they did their jobs. Altered Beast wasn't chosen as the pack-in by way of a game of Janken-Po, you know.


The popularity of the SNES holds quite strong while that of the Genesis dwindles.

Prices on the secondary market remain high for games of a company that never left the hardware business and still sells consoles, while those for games made by a company that left the hardware business more than a decade ago haven't really climbed? SHOCKED.

If I were to use your argument, I could say that the Genesis is more popular than the SNES because the SNES doesn't have a comprehensive website devoted to it. I don't, however, because that wouldn't be a valid argument.


FYI, many of the games you listed wouldn't hold my attention for more than 60 minutes. Not in 1989, and most certainly not today. Shinobi is an arcade title, and as such, takes about 30 minutes to romp through. Populous never struck me as a stand-out console title. Plays well on PC, but for the Genesis and SNES, not so much. Mystic Defender is nearly identical to Shinobi in terms of being an arcade game. Your first time through may have taken 45-60 minutes, with no real reason to revisit it.

I get the impression that you didn't really give these games a chance. The Revenge of Shinobi (not "Shinobi" - totally different game) is a long game that has multiple endings. Unless you speed run it, I highly doubt you finished it in 30 minutes. Yeah, Super Thunderblade sucked, as did a few others. They weren't all bad, though. Personally, I had lots of fun with Alex Kidd in the Enchanted Castle (being a fan from the Master System), and games like Golden Axe (much better than the arcade) and Forgotten Worlds gave me hours of fun. Again, it's all subjective.

Mystic Defender is identical to Shinobi because it's an arcade game?


You can call it bullshit if you want, but my opinion (which is based on a LOT of experience with the console) is just that, my opinion. You don't have to agree. I bought my 1st Genesis within a week of launch and my SNES on launch day. I've played both a LOT over the years as well as the TG-16 and even my fair share of the Neo-Geo. Ignorrant I am not.

I don't think you're ignorant. I think you have a preference that shapes your argument, and that's fine. I also think you worded that argument poorly, which is why you got called out.

[Rickstilwell1]

Prices on the secondary market remain high for games of a company that never left the hardware business and still sells consoles, while those for games made by a company that left the hardware business more than a decade ago haven't really climbed? SHOCKED.


That rule doesn't really work here because TurboGrafx-16 games are usually priced pretty outrageously, and that company doesn't make games anymore either. Going by this logic, TurboGrafx-16 should be worthless now and it's not.

[o.pwuaioc]

That rule doesn't really work here because TurboGrafx-16 games are usually priced pretty outrageously, and that company doesn't make games anymore either. Going by this logic, TurboGrafx-16 should be worthless now and it's not.

Nonsense. Just because one cause is true doesn't mean that it's the only cause. We have to factor in rarity, too. TG-16 games are much rarer than Genesis ones, so, even though it's off the radar, yes fewer people want them, but there are fewer going around, too.

Also, he didn't mention prices, but the price of the average Genesis game has doubled in the past 8 years, and went up significantly since 2011. I think we can thank/blame the internet for that.

I also don't know why people want the Genesis to be popular. I'd love for it to be unheard of, because the games generally aren't rare, and if they're unhyped, then they remain cheap. I'd wish for all the Youtube reviewers to just go away, and let the unknowns remain unknown so I can discover it on my own. (I'm OK with written stuff, because it's appeals to the younger, hip, retro because it's cool audience a lot less than video reviews. Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky.)

[bigbacon]

I also don't know why people want the Genesis to be popular. I'd love for it to be unheard of, because the games generally aren't rare, and if they're unhyped, then they remain cheap. I'd wish for all the Youtube reviewers to just go away, and let the unknowns remain unknown so I can discover it on my own. (I'm OK with written stuff, because it's appeals to the younger, hip, retro because it's cool audience a lot less than video reviews. Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky.)

this is sort of how I feel about the Master System. Least in the USA, it wasn't big, no one really knows anything about it. Stores that sell retro games usually don't care anything for it and don't even know how to price it because they don't get it and no one buys it. Almost the entire USA catalog of games can be bought very cheap in cart only form and not that much more for a CIB (minus a few)

It was lost in time because of the NES.

[o.pwuaioc]

this is sort of how I feel about the Master System. Least in the USA, it wasn't big, no one really knows anything about it. Stores that sell retro games usually don't care anything for it and don't even know how to price it because they don't get it and no one buys it. Almost the entire USA catalog of games can be bought very cheap in cart only form and not that much more for a CIB (minus a few)

It was lost in time because of the NES.

Thank goodness, too! I'm still working on my Master System collection. There are about 30 more that a want, a couple of those are already obscenely expensive. What's worse is that I can't import from Japan, although PAL games run the same, so that's pretty cool. I grabbed Sonic the Hedgehog pretty cheap precisely because it was a PAL game. Same with Power Strike.

[bigbacon]

Thank goodness, too! I'm still working on my Master System collection. There are about 30 more that a want, a couple of those are already obscenely expensive. What's worse is that I can't import from Japan, although PAL games run the same, so that's pretty cool. I grabbed Sonic the Hedgehog pretty cheap precisely because it was a PAL game. Same with Power Strike.

All I'm missing is Buster Douglas, I don't think I spent more than 80 dollars on a CIB game. I would say 80% were under 25 bucks.

Buster Douglas and Sonic WITH the UPC sticker are the most expensive ones, everything else could be had for under 100 bucks.

[o.pwuaioc]

All I'm missing is Buster Douglas, I don't think I spent more than 80 dollars on a CIB game. I would say 80% were under 25 bucks.

Buster Douglas and Sonic WITH the UPC sticker are the most expensive ones, everything else could be had for under 100 bucks.

$80 for me is too expensive. I think the most I've shelled out for a game was for Ogre Battle: March of the Black Queen, which costs, cart only, about as much as it did when it was released.

[Melf]

Yeah, TG-16 games, especially complete ones, are much rarer than Genesis games. Some of the CD titles can be downright outrageous expensive too.

I've noticed an upward trend of Genesis game prices on eBay over the past year or two. Titles that used to go for under $10 are now $15-$20. People seem to be noticing that there are lots of games and many of them are complete (thank you, clamshells!). I've noticed a similar trend with Master System titles too, though not to the same extent.

[Rickstilwell1]

I was under the impression that higher prices = higher popularity regardless of rarity. Just look at Earthbound and Suikoden II. The games are merely an R4 and they are worth more than most R5's, R6's and R7's. Even an R8 game system is worth less than them because it is not popular.

So what I mean is that it looks like from the outside that SNES is more popular because almost all the game prices are higher. From my memory, the SNES and Playstation were both the most popular in my area among all the kids I knew. They either had just the SNES or both the SNES and Sega Genesis during the 16 bit era. I was one of the lucky kids who got to have a hand-me-down NES after already getting a Genesis and getting to keep them all when I got the SNES. As far as my friends went, a lot of them sold their Genesis when the Playstation came out but they kept their SNES around.

Price comes from an equation of rarity + demand, and also sometimes original price is a factor too (for example Neo Geo AES)

[wiggyx]

it's a shame you didn't play the game properly, then? levels had multiple ways of being explored/completed, as well as Sonic 2 and later pack-ins like Streets of Rage 1/2, the superior Aladdin title, etc but those didn't quite fit your narrative there.

"Properly"? Ugh. I don't like Sonic 1. You're just gonna have to deal with it.

• I pointed out that AB is sorta crummy
• Someone else excused its crumminess by citing it as a pack-in
• I brought up SMW as an example of why being a pack-in is NOT an excuse to be a crappy game.


this is literally the point you brought up & continue harping on

I didn't bring it up. Also, you clearly missed my point.



what happened here was you spoke on something you don't seem to know about & comfortably painted it with a broad brush; when called on it, you got snippy/unnecessarily nasty.

I was called "simple", which is a gentle way of saying mentally deficient or retarded. I wasn't the one who got "nasty".


no one here has yet said your SNES didn't have absolute classics (and a better launch lineup, hands down!), but your statement on 60-minute games was something i'd expect of a person whose only experience with the gen/system came from wikipedia, and you don't seem to be that. you're welcome to correct me there but there's no need for insults or assumptions on the fantastic library the SNES provided - the fact that other scenes like Sega, NEC, Neo-Geo etc get slept on by various current retrospectives is indeed a larger topic worthy of discussion on another thread, but it's not in any way evident of quality, the way billboard rankings don't indicate the same.

"My SNES"? If you're offended by my opinion of early Genesis titles, then I don't know what to tell ya. I don't take someone else's opinion about a video game personally or as an insult. I also wouldn't dismiss their opinion as assumption just because I don't agree. That's rather presumptuous.


you're absolutely right on SNES overall popularity though, if we're actually back on topic here. the retro bubble the SNES scene is currently seeing is insane, as far as inflating prices - even on mass-printed titles - but i guess i kinda get it for CIB titles since so few of us actually kept the boxes.

Yup.


ehhh Shinobi only takes a bit longer than that when you've mastered it, which i wouldn't necessarily conflate with arcade by nature; you can breeze through mario games when you know what you're doing, but certainly not the first time through. the popularity of speedruns these days show that many a game can be finished quickly, i don't think that's a stirke against them. Shinobi also offers great gameplay, a fantastic soundtrack & big bosses worth revisiting; i take your points on Populus and prolly Mystic Defender too, but again we're talking about '89 (launch year) and not the next 5 years which is silly since SNES library was slow/small as fuck early on and like many great systems, most noteworthy titles showed up around halfway through its lifetime or so.

And that's your opinion, which is just fine. I feel that its arcade game-like length coupled with low replay value make it a so-so game at best.

I'm not at all trying to make this an SNES vs Genesis thing. I only ever brought up the SNES because of the idea that a pack-in game gets a free pass to be crummy because it's "free". But since you went there, all 3 SNES launch titles are still considered good games (SMW, Pilotwings, and F-Zero). Sure, there were only 3 launch titles, but I know that I will always choose quality over quantity.

Are you excusing the overall poor quality of Genesis launch titles based on the fact that they are launch titles?

Remember, you made the comparison, I'm just responding to it. I'm neither harping on nor did I bring up.



i mean, fair enough, but....how much did you play it in '93/94? many missed some of its absolute best like Crusader of Centy, Beyond Oasis, Contra Hard Crops, Castlevania Bloodlines, Dynamite Headdy, Punisher, Shadowrun, Shining Force II, etc.

Played and play it still, which I've already covered.


I bought my 1st Genesis within a week of launch and my SNES on launch day. I've played both a LOT over the years...

I wasn't ever hating on the Genesis, but rather making a commentary on the state of the industry at the time.

Again, I like the Genesis. I own a few, plus a couple of Nomads, a few portable Genesis clones, a CD & 32X, not to mention games. I think I own around 75 Genny games right now.



Again, subjective. I don't know what you would consider to be strictly a "launch" title, but how many people would consider the SNES port of Gradius III or China Warrior to be top 100 games? It all depends on opinion.

I was referring to the entire Genesis launch lineup. You're talking about one (technically not a) launch title.


Altered Beast was never meant to be a "top 100" game. It was meant to show off the console's capabilities. That's why it was chosen as the pack-in title.

My point exactly. Why can you not see that? It's a crummy game all dressed up in pretty graphics, which, as I said, were a HUGE selling point in the late 80's and early 90's. How is this an argument against any point I've made?



Prices on the secondary market remain high for games of a company that never left the hardware business and still sells consoles, while those for games made by a company that left the hardware business more than a decade ago haven't really climbed? SHOCKED.

Can you show me where I argued this point?


If I were to use your argument, I could say that the Genesis is more popular than the SNES because the SNES doesn't have a comprehensive website devoted to it. I don't, however, because that wouldn't be a valid argument.

What?



I get the impression that you didn't really give these games a chance. The Revenge of Shinobi is a long game that has multiple endings. Unless you speed run it, I highly doubt you finished it in 30 minutes. Yeah, Super Thunderblade sucked, as did a few others. They weren't all bad, though. Personally, I had lots of fun with Alex Kidd in the Enchanted Castle (being a fan from the Master System), and games like Golden Axe (much better than the arcade) and Forgotten Worlds gave me hours of fun. Again, it's all subjective.

For fuck's sake, you guys are killing me. Defending the honor of the Genesis to the bitter end as if I ever said that it's without solid titles in its library.

Heaven forbid anyone ever make a general statement lest they wish to be bombarded with every little nuance, detail, and particular related to the subject. I feel I could say that water is pretty much flavorless, and I'm almost positive that you guys could find 50 ways to explain to me why that's not true and how I haven't properly experienced water.

Sheesh.

[Melf]

I was under the impression that higher prices = higher popularity regardless of rarity. Just look at Earthbound and Suikoden II. The games are merely an R4 and they are worth more than most R5's, R6's and R7's. Even an R8 game system is worth less than them because it is not popular.

So what I mean is that it looks like from the outside that SNES is more popular because almost all the game prices are higher. From my memory, the SNES and Playstation were both the most popular in my area among all the kids I knew. They either had just the SNES or both the SNES and Sega Genesis during the 16 bit era. I was one of the lucky kids who got to have a hand-me-down NES after already getting a Genesis and getting to keep them all when I got the SNES. As far as my friends went, a lot of them sold their Genesis when the Playstation came out but they kept their SNES around.

Price comes from an equation of rarity + demand, and also sometimes original price is a factor too (for example Neo Geo AES)

I don't know if I agree. A lot of games are highly priced simply because they're rare. That doesn't necessarily equate to popularity. The TG-16 CD has a lot of rare games. This doesn't mean it's as popular or more so than the SNES. The NES has tons of cheap, common games yet remains quite popular. High prices come from a lot of factors, least of which involve popularity or game quality. Collectors are nuts and aren't necessarily buying for warm, fuzzy feelings. Just look at the sealed game market.


My point exactly. Why can you not see that? It's a crummy game all dressed up in pretty graphics, which, as I said, were a HUGE selling point in the late 80's and early 90's. How is this an argument against any point I've made?

You generalized Altered Beast. "So many of the games were terrible or had about 60 minutes of play value attached." I'm simply saying that not all games were like that, and that fact in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Frankly, I don't understand why you're even arguing against this. So many games on all consoles at the time were like this. Why is it a bad thing on the Genesis? Did you really spend hours and hours with Pilotwings or Gyromite?


Can you show me where I argued this point?

Sure. You said:


The popularity of the SNES holds quite strong while that of the Genesis dwindles.

How are you certain that the popularity of the Genesis is "dwindling?" Because people don't pay $150 for carts that are quite common, like Earthbound? You're saying that second hand market prices = popularity. One having more monetary value than the other doesn't necessarily mean that it's more popular. There are plenty of consoles with games much more expensive than those on the SNES. Does that mean they're more popular?


What?

My exact reaction to your comparison. I answered this in the above quote.


For fuck's sake, you guys are killing me. Defending the honor of the Genesis to the bitter end as if I ever said that it's without solid titles in its library.

Heaven forbid anyone ever make a general statement lest they wish to be bombarded with every little nuance, detail, and particular related to the subject. I feel I could say that water is pretty much flavorless, and I'm almost positive that you guys could find 50 ways to explain to me why that's not true and how I haven't properly experienced water.

You made a sweeping generalization founded on opinion and were surprised to find that others felt differently. For someone so eager to call out fanboys, you're awfully defensive. No one is attacking your opinion. They're jumping on you for making blanket statements without anything more than an opinion to back them up. I don't understand how you feel you can do so and then get all defensive when others do the exact same thing.

As I said, I have no problem with you having an opinion. You're entitled to it. I completely disagree, but such is the nature of subjective discussions. I do have issues with the way you worded it. That's what caused the controversy, I'd wager.

[BricatSegaFan]

"Again, I like the Genesis. I own a few, plus a couple of Nomads


Speaking of which, about those Nomad X units..... :)

[genesisguy]

"


And that's your opinion, which is just fine. I feel that its arcade game-like length coupled with low replay value make it a so-so game at best.

I'm not at all trying to make this an SNES vs Genesis thing. I only ever brought up the SNES because of the idea that a pack-in game gets a free pass to be crummy because it's "free". But since you went there, all 3 SNES launch titles are still considered good games (SMW, Pilotwings, and F-Zero). Sure, there were only 3 launch titles, but I know that I will always choose quality over quantity.

Are you excusing the overall poor quality of Genesis launch titles based on the fact that they are launch titles?

Remember, you made the comparison, I'm just responding to it. I'm neither harping on nor did I bring up.


Sheesh.

When was the last time you actually played through Revenge of Shinobi? It certainly doesn't have "arcade game-like length" More along the lines of a Castlevania styled game than a quarter muncher.

I think if given a choice I'd chose Altered Beast over Pilotwings. Both were early games and as Melf pointed out Altered Beast's point was to show the Genesis's capability of bringing home the arcade experience. Pilotwings on the other hand was basically a tech demo that showed of the SNES's capabilities. It's just me but I'd rather play something reminiscent of a late 80s arcade game than a dated tech demo.

[goldenband]

I think if given a choice I'd chose Altered Beast over Pilotwings. Both were early games and as Melf pointed out Altered Beast's point was to show the Genesis's capability of bringing home the arcade experience. Pilotwings on the other hand was basically a tech demo that showed of the SNES's capabilities. It's just me but I'd rather play something reminiscent of a late 80s arcade game than a dated tech demo.

I have no idea how this idea that Pilotwings is a glorified "tech demo" got so much traction. I've seen it repeated in a bunch of places, and when I fired it up a few years back, I expected to be totally unmoved -- but instead I found it was one of the most addictive games I've played on the SNES! Same goes for Pilotwings 64. They're incredibly well-balanced, smoothly designed, look and sound great, and are just a pleasure to play.

I actually enjoy both games -- Altered Beast was kind of an acquired taste, but improves immensely once you learn the stages well. Even so, I'd give the edge to Pilotwings for sure.

[o.pwuaioc]

Pilotwings is phenomenal. Seriously, it's 100x better than Altered Beast. Maybe AB is an acquired taste, but I see no reason to pursue it further with the 100+ better Genesis games out there.

I love how people are ignorantly arguing against wiggyx and are making his point for him. Bravo, Genesis fanboys. Way to give fans of one of the best consoles out there a bad name.

inb4 "nintendo fanboy" bullshit. I even disagree with wiggyx. Sonic 1 was superb!

[Gameguy]

Pilotwings is phenomenal. Seriously, it's 100x better than Altered Beast. Maybe AB is an acquired taste, but I see no reason to pursue it further with the 100+ better Genesis games out there.
Personally I dislike both games. I can still play them from time to time, but no more than 10 minutes before I just turn them off. Then I'm good for another few years before going back to them.

I will say that Altered Beast is better than Keith Courage.

[o.pwuaioc]

Personally I dislike both games. I can still play them from time to time, but no more than 10 minutes before I just turn them off. Then I'm good for another few years before going back to them.

I will say that Altered Beast is better than Keith Courage.

With the hate that Keith Courage gets, I sort of feel bad for it. Pilotwings isn't for everybody. It's not, I think, one of those love it or hate it games, though. Seems there are a number of fans, a number of detractors, and a lot of people in the middle. I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone defend Keith Courage, though. :(