Sega Master System Versus Nintendo Entertainment System.

[Aswald]

Which did you think was, overall, better? I would say the NES.

[Raccoon Lad]

WRONG!!! Sega Master System anhilliates the NES.
Unfortunately, the NES has more good games than the SMS has both good and bad games...in the US that is.
In Europe, they got some GREAT games, in fact, there are about 200 more games available in Europe for the SMS than in the US.

Compare ANY cross platform games between the 2 systems, and the SMS version wins 90% of the time.

[Arrrhalomynn]

I totally, 100% agree with Raccoon Lad.
The NES doesn't stand a change against the SMS.

[CrazyImpmon]

I'd give NES points only because it had huge number of games (around 800 NES games in USA, over 2000 Famicom worldwide) but I prefer SMS over NES for better graphics, better sound, portability (via Game Gear and Master Gear) and the cool case that keeps the game and manual safe. NES didn't have anything beside dust sleeve, and dust sleeve is often too small to handle monster manuals like Final Fantasy or Dragon Warrior 4

[omnedon]

The SMS was the more powerful system, hamstrung by the fact that the NES had many "exclusive" deals with developers. The SMS was left at the dance with hardly anyone left to dance with.

That is why the NES had so many more games. Momentum and deals.

In 1988, I had the SMS, and finding good games was tricky. My buds all with NES's were enjoying literally hundreds of rental choices at the corner store.

-sigh-
:?

[Tempest]

Hard to say. If we're only going on US released games then the NES blows the SMS away, but if we're including all games then the SMS is the better system. Some of the things they did for the SMS in Brazil was absolutely amazing. Streetfighter II and Mortal Kombat 3 on the NES? I don't think so...

Tempest

[Sylentwulf]

The nintendo had better games, and better controllers. Thus, it sold better as well.

I'm HOPING, that 10 years from now, everyone who is saying Sega hardware (SMS, genesis, saturn, DC) are better than the other, more apparent system leaders, will ALSO be saying that the X-box was the superior system.... Regardless of the fact the the "Superior systems" all got their asses kicked. The jaguar was a damn nice machine, but I wouldn't ever say it was superior to anything else out at the time OverAll....

[geelw]

the original poster was probably thinking about the u.s. nes, obviously. you can't just throw imported sms games into the mix while ignoring the import nintendo stuff at all... :shock:

(there's gonna be some fighting going on in this particular forum, lol...)

as far as u.s. stuff, i'd go with the nes for sheer variety, and the sms for technology. import systems, famicom (variety), sms (longevity). imagine if nintendo had kept the carts the same size (well, the one size that's smallest, as there are at least half a dozen cart shapes), and made a portable nes system... :wink:

[TRM]

I have a list comparing the games on each console. Lets truely see...

http://www.planetnintendo.com/thewarpzone/misc/sms%20vs%20nes.txt

[ashbourn]

I have a link that hows for games that were on both systems the graphics difference and it is huge i try to find it.

[ashbourn]

I found it http://www.segamastersystem.com/ver2/smsvsnesmain.htm

[Sega Hitman]

Well I think there's no arguement about the SMS being technologically superior, it would have to be seeing as it was released so much later. That really isn't the point. The point is, the NES had way better games, and thats why it blew away SMS's sales.

Granted a few games like Rampage or After Burner might have been better versions of the games, and granted Golden Axe and Phantasy Star are both very good, but what the hell are you on if you think SMS is better than NES? Sure SMS had good games, and sure a few cool pirate games came out in Brazil, but come on folks! Mario 1-3, Mega Man 1-6, Mike Tyson's Punchout, Metal Gear, Metroid, Tetris, Zelda 1 and 2, Ninja Gaiden 1-3, Final Fantasy, the Dragon Warrior's, Donkey Kong, Tecmo Bowl, and so on and so on and so on. Sure the SMS is prettier, but the NES's library wins no contest. I'm a Sega freak, but I can't be biased about it, NES is the better system to own.

This is like comparing PSX and Saturn, or PSX and DC, which would probably get the same response out of some of you. For some reason, collectors just love things that aren't mainstream. PSX has a much better library than either system, yet people are out there that will swear up and down that the Sega system's are better. I'll never understand this...

-Hitman-

[omnedon]

but what the hell are you on if you think SMS is better than NES?

Define "better".




I'm a Sega freak, but I can't be biased about it, NES is the better system to own.


I'll accept that definition. Back in the day, I wished I had an NES. I wear it as a badge of honour now. :D I think the SMS was a technolgically superior machine, which was also manufactured better. Ever hear of SMS blink? Me neither. However, it all comes down to the games, and the NES, thru superior marketing and muscle, delivered a vastly better selection and choices to gamers.

[Mr. NEStalgia]

The NES it DEFINITELY better!!!!!
because I never played the SMS :lol: :rofl:

-=Mr. NEStalgia=-

[Sega Hitman]

Well by better, I mean if you could have one or the other, which would you chose? In 1990, or 2002, I think you'd have a lot more fun with an NES. Nuff said.

I agree that the SMS is technologically superior, but why is that even an arguement? That's like saying that X-box is technically superior to Dreamcast. No crap it is. The NES was released a lot earlier, so of course it's games will seem more dated. If you're judging by what system has the better games, which is really what it all comes down too, I think the NES wins by a longshot.

-Hitman-

[NE146]

Well as a person who had both systems during their heyday (i.e. when they were new) and who ACTIVELY bought games at full price for both (often at the same time), I gotta tell it like it is...

Quite honestly, I enjoyed/played the NES more. Now don't get me wrong, I loved my SMS and put in many hours with playing and completing all the usuals (Phantasy Star, Shinobi, Golvellius, R-Type, Y's .. you name it). But the NES software just seemed to be more "solid" and thus I played it more.

In retrospect, as I think about it, you know what bugged me about the SMS? It was the SOUND! The music and sound effects always seemed to sound really really cheesy!!!!! (Anyone else agree?). It was just an aspect of playing games on it that the sound seemed to be played from something like a baby's keyboard with it's "off" or 'soft' synthy sounds.

That being said, I often went out to the stores LOOKING for new SMS games, even when there were none and I had them all... so it obviously didn't turn me off too much with the SMS. Because it is a fact that the RPG element of the SMS was tops over the NES, w/ Y's, Phantasy Star, and Golvellius. The closest the NES ever came to that in the US was when Final Fantasy 1 came out. But it didn't have 3D dungeons like Phantasy Star I used to say. ;)

But let's face it, the quality of the NES titles such as Megaman 2's sound and graphics were never matched by any SMS game and since it's all about the software (which the NES also has more of).... I like both, but the winner is NES.

[omnedon]

I agree, if it's about available quality games, the poor SMS got it's ass kicked. And when is it not about the games? :)

Since we're mainly collectors here, there simply is no excuse not to have both. Which is better for "collectible" value? The SMS's are far more "rare" than a NES, and stand a better possibilty of becoming very rare, as the years go by. (Vectrex anyone?) The SMS's are so obscure, they don't even fetch much $$$ on E-bay. I think many bidders don't know what they are.

If you want to have a representation of the consoles that represent the renaissance, after the big crash, you need an SMS and an NES. If you wanna play a lot of old 8 bit games, the NES was and is the one.

fast forward to 2002, and I have both! 8)

[nesman85]

SMS was better on paper, NES is better overall.

[congobongo]

I was an SMS owner in it's day. At the time I was an SMS snob and wanted to see Nintendo go down. Now I own both. I admit that the NES has a lot more quality games. No argument there. But, I think what the SMS has is more style. It's like comparing a Hummer to a Porche. There both amazing vehicles but you like each for it's own reasons.

[Raccoon Lad]

One thing the NES had going for it was the fact that every tiny ioda of power it had was tapped to it's fullest by the programmers. With so many people programming for it and learning all it's tricks, the later NES games got REALLY polished. Had Nintendo not monopolised all the 3rd party publishers, the SMS could have had all it's tricks exploited too. Poor SEGA, they tried their hardest to publish enough software to keep it going. I'd like to see a comparison between how much first party software the 2 companies put out during 86-90, something tells me Sega had put out more.
Anyway, if Sega actually had as many programmers pushing the system to it's max as Nintendo did, I believe the Master System could have put out some games that would have rivaled many 16-bit titles.

The sad fact is that Nintendo controlled the industry by such a huge margin that I was hardly aware of the SMS's existance untill I got a genesis and read on the back of the box "Power Base converter, now you can play over 80 sega master system games on your genesis. and more games means more power."
I'm sure this thread will soon be flooded with people who ONLY have played the NES, saying sega is crud, but I ask those fools to try Wonder Boy 3, Phantasy Star, or Fantasy Zone 2...I think they might change their opinion.

[sphereman]

I say Sega Master rules because of it's 3-D Games.
Thanks,
Tim 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

[punkoffgirl]

Where's Tyler these days? This thread is right up his alley, for goodness sakes!

As for me, cast another vote for NES.

[theaveng]

I think the SMS v. NES situation is similar to today's X-box v. PS2 comparision. The SMS/X-box clearly have superior graphics, but they both lack games. The widest selection is on the NES/PS2.

Sometimes selling the best technology isn't enough to win the market.... just ask VCR-manufacturer BETA. :wink:

[maxlords]

Personally, I've always been partial to the SMS. I never owned either system till well after they were dead. I currently own about 30 domestic NES titles, and about 20 domestic SMS titles (domestic being US). I find myself more often playing my SMS than my NES, even though I really like a few NES series (Dragon Warrior, Ninja Gaiden, Mega Man, Castlevania). But I LOVE Wonderboy, Alex Kidd, Phantasy Star, Miracle Warriors, and Y's :)

I'd have to say that for sheer content and variety, the NES wins, but I still like the SMS better. It didn't have as many games, but they're a bit more unique IMO.

[leonk]

theaveng:

There was never a company called BETA, it was sony that invented BETA.

Rest:

3D games on SMS? There are some 3D games on NES that require you to wear 3D glasses to play the game (this feature can be turned off).

When it comes to technology, you'll always find competition in our democracy, and hence you have to try and focus on what you mean by the word "better". You always have one thing "better" than another in different aspects.

H/W specifications - SMS
Marketing - NES
World wide acceptence - NES
cool looking system - SMS
Protecting carts/manuals - SMS
Comfertable size of carts (to put in your pocket) - SMS
Number of games - NES
Selection of games at rental stores - NES
Number of companies supporting and developing - NES


So, you decide what's the most important thing for you above and decide!

LK

[video_game_addict]

Comfertable size of carts (to put in your pocket) - SMS :roll: I'm not even going to ask what's that for.

Oh and I vote for NES too. I have around 80 SMS games, and like it alot, but overall, the Nes still wins out. Theres just far more better games on the Nes.

[ashbourn]

I would have to agree if u ware going to be talking over.
I also think that saturn and Dreamcast are both better then Playstation, and think that PS2 is better then Xbox, but xbox is better the GameCube.

[YoshiM]

From my experience: the SMS in the US stunk when it came to quality titles. There were some decent titles, but the NES had the exclusives and it was a serious money-maker. For a machine that was released after the NES, Sega should have followed Nintendo's examples:

Controller: every controller I played with for the SMS seemed extremely "floaty". It was too easy to pull off a wrong move at the wrong time. The solid cross-pad on the NES, while cutting into your thumb after a long period of play, was very accurate.

Pause button: why did they put it on the deck and then require some games to use it for inventory or some other function while in play? There should have been a pause button on the controller.

Then there were the games. For every Phantasy Star there was a Black Belt. The better titles for the system still didn't seem overly "polished" as compared to the competing NES games. Many of the games I played seemed to have been tossed together to get to market.

My 2 zenny on this.

[Aswald]

Hoo, boy, did I start something here...

I guess I should have been a bit more specific. I've always known that the SMS was technically superior to the NES, but I said "overall"- this means taking everything into account.

The 5200 is, I suppose, "superior" to the ColecoVision, but the ColecoVision was the better overall system- more games, a bigger variety (RPGs, strategy games, etc.), as well as the more practical considerations- it is easier to find replacement parts, most classic controllers (2600, 7800, Commodore, etc.) will work on a CV (to a point, at least), and the consoles and games are much easier to find- I now have nearly a dozen CVs, but I've only found one 5200- which I had to repair- several years ago (1997).

It's the same with the NES- It has more classic games that I like, a better variety (to me), and it is simply much easier to find games for it than the SMS. Both systems have RPGs, extensive, and the better cosmetics of the SMS ones (such as Phantasy Star) aren't important to me, so Wizardry is fine. I also prefer the arcade selection of the NES to that of the SMS.

But hey, what do I know- in 1988, I bought a 7800...which I wouldn't have done, if CV Joust had been completed and released when it was supposed to have been. It actually stands up nicely to the 7800 and NES versions.

[ShinobiMan]

Wow, look what I missed.

It's something that has been disputed on the boards before, and I still say, given my top 10 favorite SMS games, I'd have a better time with them than I would my top 10 favorite NES games.

It's kinda strange coming from a kid who grew up with a Nintendo at the age of 3, but I just happen to enjoy sega games more, enough said.

I love the NES too, so many memories of staying up late playing Mega Man 2 or Castlevania 3. I just find something extremely special in the whole SMS story, and because of that I appreciate the games more. The SMS could have been pushed so far from 3rd party developers like Konami and Capcom had Nintendo not have owned the market the way they did. And for how hard Sega tried to push they're superior machine I give them kudos.

Nice to see my SMS VS. NES comparison link showing up, I think that's a great comparison though I should put a litle description into it.

Here's hoping I don't miss another discussion like this!

[NE146]

yep

[jaydubnb]

This is like comparing PSX and Saturn, or PSX and DC, which would probably get the same response out of some of you. For some reason, collectors just love things that aren't mainstream. PSX has a much better library than either system, yet people are out there that will swear up and down that the Sega system's are better. I'll never understand this...

-Hitman-

I really don't want to veer this off the main topic, but from what I've experienced, the same thing that makes the non-mainstream system non-mainstream, is what attracts some people: it offers something different. I know people who love Saturn above all else because its a shooter monster. Personally, I'll take the DC over the PS1 anyday for the 2D fighters and the shooters - - both non mainstream genres. In fact, now that I think about it my liking of a system is a KISS OF DEATH...the NGPC, DC, Turbo, all went bye bye quickly. In fact, the NES is the only mainstream system that I really, really enojyed and still come back to til this day. So saying that system X has a better library than system Y is all a matter of opinion. And yes the NES is better than the SMS!*

*obvious attempt to get back on topic :)

[ApolloBoy]

Puh-leese. I don't think we should carry on with this annoying fanboyish discussion. In short, I like both. 'Nuff said.

[The Manimal]

I'm new to SMS games, but I'm finding that I still like NES games more. Some of these games, like Zillion, remind me of playing that hideously bad Goonies arcade game. Yuk! Favorite right now is CHOPLIFTER. I can't get past the second level, but it's freakin' ADDICTIVE!

[YoshiM]

Puh-leese. I don't think we should carry on with this annoying fanboyish discussion. In short, I like both. 'Nuff said.

This coming from a person who has "Running Fanboy" in their avatar header. :P

It's always interesting to see people's perspectives on this even if it does get a bit heated.

As for the thought of "what if there wasn't a 3rd party lock in the US" I still think the SMS would have had a heckuva time. As I said before, the advertising wasn't all that great and (at least in my area) availability wasn't all that grand either. Every place, even the local discount stores (like Prange Way and Fleet Farm) sold Nintendo. All the rental places only had Nintendo. Even if it had access to 3rd parties (which probably would have gotten sweeter deals from Nintendo for exclusitivity) they still needed advertising to get the word out.

[Raccoon Lad]

Alot of the NES's advertising was FROM 3rd parties, so if Sega actually had any 3rd parties besides Parker Brothers and Seismic (activision doesn't count because the games they released were actually programmed by sega) in the US, you MIGHT have actually seen some decent Sega ad campaigns.

Nintendo's 3rd party lockout gave them all the money they needed to advertise, and Sega's poor decision to allow Tonka to distribute the SMS hindered their advertising as well.

[Ruudos]

I vote for NES, while I like the SMS too.
It has been said before, the SMS controller is inferior to the NES one. By far!
Also the music on NES is far better, just play both versions of Double Dragon.
SMS has better graphics (colors) but I believe NES has a higher resolution.

While the SMS has far better game cases, the box art of the earlier game is terrible.

[Captain Wrong]

yep



Hmm...I wonder how many people who posted recent replies notice this is not the same NES vs SMS topic started a few days ago.

[Gamemaster_ca_2003]

Chock another one for the NES

my reasons
Better Games
More Games
sold more systems that any other console or Computer at that time.

Now here is something

If the NES, SMS, 7800 and INTV III were on the same page 3rd Party wise and meida coverage wise who would have won.

[eolsen]

NES was better

[SegaTecToy]

SMS is still being sold in Brazil. It is a version with 30 games built-in. It's not a pirate console because the company that make them is licensed by Sega. I bought a brazilian DC some weeks ago and I will get today a new brazilian Saturn in my post office. They make new Genesis(Mega Drive) consoles too. I guess they are the only place in world still making Sega hardware. Unfortunately they didn't make Sega CD units anymore... :(

[SegaTecToy]

Oh, by the way I'll vote in SMS. I support the underdogs... :D

[Wavelflack]

"Sometimes selling the best technology isn't enough to win the market.... just ask VCR-manufacturer BETA"

That would be Sony, and they certainly learned their lesson, didn't they?
"Next time we put out a technological platform, let's make sure it's inferior!"

Eventually the idea paid off, and we got PS2.

:)

[Jasoco]

1980's:
NES has more games. SMS is more powerful.
NES wins.

1990's-2000's:
PSX/PS2 have more games. Other systems are technically superior.
PSX/PS2 win.

What am I missing here?

I'm a Nintendo fan at heart. But have my mind open to everyone else.

But as a kid, I was a NES kid. I had never heard of Sega until the Genesis.. and I watched A LOT of TV and looked at LOTS of magazines. Where was Sega's ad campaign? I never saw a commercial for the SMS. Tells you a lot, doesn't it?

[Neonsolid]

Gone.

[Brian_Provinciano]

It's all about the games, and the NES wins there.

As for hardware, the NES is more powerful. Yes, the SMS is 3.58Mhz, and the NES is only 1.78. However! The NES uses the 6502 CPU and the SMS uses the Z80 CPU. The Z80 CPU isn't bad, but it's a very inefficient CPU, and takes about a minimum of four cycles per instruction, although most need at least eight, and some as much as 23! The 6502 does instructions in as little as two! As a result, that 3.58Mhz can't simply be compared to the 1.78Mhz as it is! The 6502 is about three times the speed of the Z80, if not more.

As well, ever wonder why those NES carts have 72 pins while the SMS only have 50? It's because the cartridge has direct access to the PPU video processor. With that, the possibilites are endless! With an FPGA or other hardware, one could render 3D on the NES easily since you can control what's in the video memory without having to execute any game code! With the SMS, to alter the graphics, the code must indirectly access the video processor.

I'm not into Atari 2600 development, but the 2600 and NES are two very unique systems, which are capable of many wacky things with very limited hardware due to how they were designed. With the 2600, you have direct control over each scanline and how it is drawn. With the NES, you can also have control over each scanline (in slightly different ways though). As well, the NES' CHR (graphics) bankswitching alone can save frames of code, thanks to the direct PPU access.

[Wavelflack]

Hee hee! I guess that would explain why NES games ended up with an entire series of MMC chips integrated into the carts. Because the technically superior NES..er..um..required such crutches to accomplish things such as windows and split playfields.

This reminds me of when Nintendo argued that the SNES was actually faster than the Genesis because it had a lower memory latency, or something to that effect.

Remember, Choplifter (1st gen game--naybe even a launch game?) featured line scrolling and at least 2 separate backgrounds. Have you seen that in any NES games? I notice a curious lack of assistance chips in SMS carts...

[Brian_Provinciano]

Hee hee! I guess that would explain why NES games ended up with an entire series of MMC chips integrated into the carts. Because the technically superior NES..er..um..required such crutches to accomplish things such as windows and split playfields.

This reminds me of when Nintendo argued that the SNES was actually faster than the Genesis because it had a lower memory latency, or something to that effect.

Remember, Choplifter (1st gen game--naybe even a launch game?) featured line scrolling and at least 2 separate backgrounds. Have you seen that in any NES games? I notice a curious lack of assistance chips in SMS carts...

The SMS have almost the same memory limits as the NES and also have MMC equivilant chips. However, because SMS carts do not have direct access to the video, they are limited in what they can do. Much like Game Boy games. The old NES MMCs are much more powerful than the GBs MMCs (or "MBC"s as they are called for the GB), even the GB Color MBC is less powerful!

The NES was first released in Japan in 1983, in which RAM was expensive, so it shipped with 2K of WRAM and 2K of VRAM. Later games had up to 32K of built in RAM! This was simply because memory was cheaper later. The SMS being from 1986 had potential to be more powerful, since games already often had 8K of on board CHRRAM (such as Rad Racer, Metroid). The NES is more capable and more extendable, the best of both worlds.

Both the SMS and NES limit you to a 64K of program memory space. They are arranged a bit differently. For example, tje NES by default gives you 32K of space into the high memory area, although with mappers, it can be mapped into other areas and such.

Anyway, to sum it up, SMS carts use mapper hardware as well. All systems which use CPUs with limited memory space like the NES' 6502, SMS/GG's Z80, the GB's i80 clone, etc. must use memory mappers or there games will all look first gen. Every GBC cart for example, uses the MBC5 chip. Otherwise the games would be limited to 32K!

[Wavelflack]

Without opening up Choplifter (which I suppose I can do), for instance, would you care to give me an example of SMS games which use memory mapping chips?

I know very little about programming, but I have read much about the NES' variety of MMCs, and it seems that there are unique capabilities to each one incorporated. For instance, some of the earliest MMCs were used apparently to facilitate bank switching and memory limitations, and the examples given are the "golden three"--Metroid, Kid Icarus, and Zelda--larger games. Later MMcs were used to facilitate special fx, such as diagonal scrolling (or was it 3-way scrolling?), windows, split screens (Mario 3's utility bar is an example given), and limited independent scrolling. In this regard, it seems that the MMCs (5 or 6 in the NES series) are functioning more in a coprocessor role. Perhaps they are listed as "MMC" for convenience, but in actuality are more than just a postman? I don't know, but it's there.

in any case, are you arguing that the SMS' native capabilities are less than the NES'? Give some conclusive proof, not just theoreticals (ie; PS2 66MPPS). It's readily apparent that SMS not only has a larger palette, but also can handle more sprites (and MUCH larger ones at that), as well as little graphical subroutines such as line scrolling, etc. It has inferior sound; I'll concede that. But arguing that SMS doesn't have a raw horsepower advantage over NES just seems ludicrous. The examples are out there to look at. You can argue that the Dreamcast is somehow more powerful (or efficient) than Xbox because of deferred rendering, but the reality just overwhelmes the theoretical. I remind you that Nintendo (well, their consumer service dept.) personally assured me that SNES was faster than Genesis based on memory access time. Where is the proof? It doesn't exist.



I'll open up Choplifter in a second. Let's see what's inside to help it run line scrolling and independent backgrounds.

Someone should put up an example of the ultimate technical achievement of NES vs. the ultimate technical achievement of SMS.

[Brian_Provinciano]

Without opening up Choplifter (which I suppose I can do), for instance, would you care to give me an example of SMS games which use memory mapping chips?

I know very little about programming, but I have read much about the NES' variety of MMCs, and it seems that there are unique capabilities to each one incorporated. For instance, some of the earliest MMCs were used apparently to facilitate bank switching and memory limitations, and the examples given are the "golden three"--Metroid, Kid Icarus, and Zelda--larger games. Later MMcs were used to facilitate special fx, such as diagonal scrolling (or was it 3-way scrolling?), windows, split screens (Mario 3's utility bar is an example given), and limited independent scrolling. In this regard, it seems that the MMCs (5 or 6 in the NES series) are functioning more in a coprocessor role. Perhaps they are listed as "MMC" for convenience, but in actuality are more than just a postman? I don't know, but it's there.

in any case, are you arguing that the SMS' native capabilities are less than the NES'? Give some conclusive proof, not just theoreticals (ie; PS2 66MPPS). It's readily apparent that SMS not only has a larger palette, but also can handle more sprites (and MUCH larger ones at that), as well as little graphical subroutines such as line scrolling, etc. It has inferior sound; I'll concede that. But arguing that SMS doesn't have a raw horsepower advantage over NES just seems ludicrous. The examples are out there to look at. You can argue that the Dreamcast is somehow more powerful (or efficient) than Xbox because of deferred rendering, but the reality just overwhelmes the theoretical. I remind you that Nintendo (well, their consumer service dept.) personally assured me that SNES was faster than Genesis based on memory access time. Where is the proof? It doesn't exist.



I'll open up Choplifter in a second. Let's see what's inside to help it run line scrolling and independent backgrounds.

Someone should put up an example of the ultimate technical achievement of NES vs. the ultimate technical achievement of SMS.

Choplifter on the NES uses no mapper hardware for it's scrolling, just the use of the built in VBLANK (NMI) interrupt, and precise timing. You might not notice, but Super Mario Bros. does the same thing! It sets the scroll value on vblank, kills a few CPU cycles with useless code, then changes the scroll register again. The game actually barely uses any mapper at all, just the simplest graphical bankswitching.

Most SMS games use mappers (anything over 32K, which are most). The difference is that while NES games use Mapper Chips + PRG ROM + CHR ROM/RAM, most SMS games use custom chips with the mapper+ROM built in one! As a result, if making an SMS devcart that runs anything > 32K, you need to find specific ones which do not use this layout.

The non-mapper based NES and SMS have both areas in their graphics in which the NES is better, and areas in which the SMS is better.

NES: The NES can have 512 tiles loaded at once, the SMS 448.
NES: The NES can have 32x60/64x30 background tile maps, the SMS only 32x28
NES: The NES screen is 256x240, the SMS is 256x192
SMS: The NES can have 25 colours on screen at once (more with special coding, no extra hardware required). The SMS can have 32 without trickery.
DRAW: SMS tiles are 4-bit of one palette. The NES are 2-bit of four palettes, using an additional attribute table for which of the four palettes to use. This allows the use of more unique tiles, since the same tile with different colours only needs to be in memory once.
SMS: The NES palettes can be selected from 52 different colours, the SMS from 64.
NES: NES can use CHR ROM or RAM (no mapper needed). With CHR ROM load times can be reduced. SMS uses a CHRRAM equivilant method.

They are both good systems, I'll put it like that. Another misconception of the SMS' features though, is of the Game Gear. The Game Gear _is_ SMS compatible, but not vice-versa. The Game Gear is an extended SMS, so that 4096 colours junk and such is _only_ Game Gear, not SMS.

Beause the NES' hardware is so limited, much much much more can be accomplished with less hardware. For example, to animate the background, all you need to to is spend four CPU cycles to change the CHR ROM bank! With SMS, GG, GB, GBA, etc., you must rewrite a bunch of tiles to the graphics RAM, which can really really reduce a framerate.

But like I said, they are both good systems.

[-hellvin-]

My vote goes to the sega master system. I had a game gear back in the day and my friend had a SMS so I have a huge nostalgia for it. My favorite game gear game which was a Euro release is defenitely Land Of Illusion! Kick ass graphics and gameplay and sweet music as well. Great game.

[Cauterize]

Master System all the way! Easily!

[Wavelflack]

Choplifter on the NES uses no mapper hardware for it's scrolling, just the use of the built in VBLANK (NMI) interrupt, and precise timing. You might not notice, but Super Mario Bros. does the same thing! It sets the scroll value on vblank, kills a few CPU cycles with useless code, then changes the scroll register again. The game actually barely uses any mapper at all, just the simplest graphical bankswitching.




There is no Choplifter on NES. I presume that you meant SMS, but I wonder.
In any case, I am not talking about scrolling the entire screen, but line scrolling. There is nothing of the sort in SMB, and indeed (to my awareness) not at ALL on NES. Perhaps line scrolling is an archaic term, so I'll explain: Individual scanlines scrolling at independent rates. Street Fighter 2 reviewers called this "warping". Look at the floors of SF2, or the water in Sonic 1 or 2. Now you know what I mean. Got get a copy of Choplifter and an SMS, and play it. Then tell me if it could be attempted on NES, and if so, why have I seen nothing of this technique on NES?
Not only does it have the line scrolling, but also has independent (ie; separately scrolling) background layers. The game is not slow, either, nor does it slowdown.

Incidentally, I can see careful timing and VDP tricks creating a pseudo line scrolling effect, but not when foreground objects are present; they would warp as well, and that's no good. Again, look at Choplifter. Rocks, tanks, buildings, etc.

This is an early 1st gen SMS game. I have only seen pictures of the last gen SMS games, but they are extremely impressive and I literally cannot imagine the NES coming remotely close to pulling some of that off. See the MK series, or whatever you like. If NES could do any of that (even Choplifter graphical techniques), then it would have. Look at the number of developers NES had working on it. They were not sitting on their thumbs. Look at the Nintendo R&D depts., Rare, Codemasters, whoever, all working to squeeze what they can out of the NES. Somehow they overlooked ways to beat SMS on all of this? I doubt it.

Give examples. Show where the peak of NES achievement outshone SMS. Until then, it's a theoretical dream that has proven insuperable.

[Brian_Provinciano]

There is no Choplifter on NES. I presume that you meant SMS, but I wonder.
In any case, I am not talking about scrolling the entire screen, but line scrolling. There is nothing of the sort in SMB, and indeed (to my awareness) not at ALL on NES. Perhaps line scrolling is an archaic term, so I'll explain: Individual scanlines scrolling at independent rates. Street Fighter 2 reviewers called this "warping". Look at the floors of SF2, or the water in Sonic 1 or 2. Now you know what I mean. Got get a copy of Choplifter and an SMS, and play it. Then tell me if it could be attempted on NES, and if so, why have I seen nothing of this technique on NES?
Not only does it have the line scrolling, but also has independent (ie; separately scrolling) background layers. The game is not slow, either, nor does it slowdown.

Incidentally, I can see careful timing and VDP tricks creating a pseudo line scrolling effect, but not when foreground objects are present; they would warp as well, and that's no good. Again, look at Choplifter. Rocks, tanks, buildings, etc.

This is an early 1st gen SMS game. I have only seen pictures of the last gen SMS games, but they are extremely impressive and I literally cannot imagine the NES coming remotely close to pulling some of that off. See the MK series, or whatever you like. If NES could do any of that (even Choplifter graphical techniques), then it would have. Look at the number of developers NES had working on it. They were not sitting on their thumbs. Look at the Nintendo R&D depts., Rare, Codemasters, whoever, all working to squeeze what they can out of the NES. Somehow they overlooked ways to beat SMS on all of this? I doubt it.

Give examples. Show where the peak of NES achievement outshone SMS. Until then, it's a theoretical dream that has proven insuperable.

There is a choplifter for the NES, a first gen game also--although it's actually a Famicom only game (Famicom and NES are the same system).

None the less, the NES can do "line scrolling" as well, it's called parallax scrolling, an effect to give a pseudo 3D effect. I know of a lot of games that do this on the NES. In the background, Batman Return of the Joker uses it a bit, 3D World Runner does as well (in a slightly different way). Super Mario Bros. 3, of course, uses it for the warp zones, on the entire screen, making waves. In fact the homebrew game Solar Wars does this, and many other demos exist as well. It can be done without a mapper, but it's more efficient to use one, in which case, one with an IRQ such as MMC3-6 is good.

Neither the NES or SMS have background layers, that was in the SNES, etc. Parallax scrolling can be done in two different ways, by "line scrolling" the background (and when the graphics are done properly, it really can look like different layers), or by sprites. There are many NES games which use sprites, which would give a layered effect as well. There are also homebrew demos (nesdev.parodius.com).

As well, Super Mario World ( http://www.bripro.com/low/obscure/index.php?page=hko_smw ) was ported to the NES (Famicom), as well as many incarnations of Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat (even Tekken), all in the past years by pirate companies. MK and SFII were also officially ported to the SMS, GG, and Game Boy! They were simply not ported to the NES officially because the system was dead. None of these fighters are that great though, not for the NES, GB, SMS, or GG, heh. Some of the SFIIs on Famicom are alright though.

To explain why new SMS games can be better than the old NES ones is simple. Two reasons: 1) companies usually won't put more effort into their games than they need to, until other companies come out with more impressive stuff, in which case they'd need to improve their stuff to compete. Games were simpler then, so developers didn't have to put as much into them. 2) Do you know how much easier it is now to do the games? heh. With emulators, Windows and other GUIs, good bitmap editing software, fast PCs, efficient compilers--if they had the tools we have now, the NES and SMS games would be incredible!

Systems are all about the games, and it's clear that you love the SMS for them. I love the NES more for the games I'm nostalgic about. It's all good. When it comes down to it, it doesn't matter which system is more powerful. Same reason I play PS2 over X-Box and GC, it's all about the games. I do in fact have a couple SMS consoles, a handful of GGs, and many games, so I do play it too.

As a programmer, I'm developing an NES game because not only am I nostalgic about the system, it really does, no questions asked, give a developer the ability to be more creative and do more.

The fact that NES games use mappers is not very important, as all of the systems did, other than for first gen games. The mappers were generally very little cost compared to the ROMs, and were pretty much built into the price.

The MMC5 gives the NES graphics overall, far more superior to the SMS or even GG. It allows 16384 background tiles at once (vs. the SMS 256). It also allows automatic horzontal split screen, and a scanline IRQ allowing for easy vertical split screen. It gives enhanced graphic and program banks switching, and also includes hardware aided 8bit*8bit->16bit multiplication. It's very powerful, but as for code, other than the aided multiplication, I wouldn't exactly call it a co-processor. It's really just a bankswitcher still, with a few bonus features (basically just counters).

The MMC6 is just a slightly modified MMC3, which is nothing compared to MMC5. Just a bankswitcher + scanline counter IRQ.

As for the peak of NES outshining the SMS, you'll see soon enough, when I release my ultimate homebrew NES game, heh. I've been working on it for well over a year, and will hopefully have it done by the end of this one.

Every graphical effect the SMS can do, the NES can do as well, and then some! If you find an SMS game that does something completely wacky that you don't think the NES can do, let me know. I'll explain how it can be done on the NES as well ;)

[Brian_Provinciano]

Re: my previous post

SMB3 actually doesn't do the "line scrolling" on the NES, that was the GBA version I was thinking of, heh. But sas well as the other games I mentioned, the title screen for the Adventures of Bayou Billy does it, as well as the racing game "High Speed" on the NES. F1-Race, a first gen, no mapper game did small amounts of it as well, as well as Rad Racer, a second gen game using MMC1.

[Psycho Mantis]

nes all the way! I love the nes so much! it's got so many better games than the
sega master system.

[pixelsnpolygons]

Master System. Nothing against the NES, but I choose the SMS hands down. Great design, great games - wonderful color. I dunno, a lot of my choice has to do with nostaglia - I spent a lot of time with that system.

[HC Andersson]

Master System is my absolute favourite! But the there are greater melodies in the NES-games.

[Ernster]

To the above posts why the hell are you debating which was more powerful? Who gives a f--k, were talking about two 8-bit systems, does it matter which had better graphics or was more powerful? I thought we played retro consoles for the gameplay not graphics.... O_O

Anyway to answer this threads question, NES is better, im not going to waste my time answering why because the answer is so obvious.

[slip81]

That's though, The NES has a lot of great games I like, but I would have to go with SMS because it did have a lot of the same games, plus a bunch of great ones the NES doesn't have. And it's waaaay easier and cheaper to collect for. Plus I'm just a bigger Sega fan in general.

[Ed Oscuro]

To the above posts why the hell are you debating which was more powerful?
Your answer is definitely going to work, but the thing is - HAD the SMS gotten better support, it would be more fondly remembered by the public as a whole.

Now look at the present day scenario of XBox vs. PS2 - which is better? XBox, really! In every aspect but that of the built-up customer base and number of games, and I suppose price point was long in its favor too - which are impressive stats by themselves, of course - the XBox really does whip the PS2.

[Brian_Provinciano]

To the above posts why the hell are you debating which was more powerful? Who gives a f--k, were talking about two 8-bit systems, does it matter which had better graphics or was more powerful? I thought we played retro consoles for the gameplay not graphics.... O_O

Anyway to answer this threads question, NES is better, im not going to waste my time answering why because the answer is so obvious.

Holy Spazz Batman! If you read all the posts, you would see that my very first post states:

"It's all about the games, and the NES wins there. As for hardware..."

Following, some people asked some questions about the hardware, the game special effects, etc., and answered them. Continuing with another quote from one of my following posts: "They are both good systems, I'll put it like that." and "But like I said, they are both good systems." and "Systems are all about the games, and it's clear that you love the SMS for them. I love the NES more for the games I'm nostalgic about. It's all good. When it comes down to it, it doesn't matter which system is more powerful. Same reason I play PS2 over X-Box and GC, it's all about the games...".

So, like I said, we weren't arguing which was more powerful, but rather discussing capabilities, and the potential of their games. There's nothing wrong with discussing the hardware behind systems.

[Wavelflack]

I forgot about this, and I suppose I should respond. I don't want to go through debating every last syllable, but I'll hit the high spots.

"None the less, the NES can do "line scrolling" as well, it's called parallax scrolling, an effect to give a pseudo 3D effect."

I have been given the understanding that "parallax scrolling" is a generic term regarding any pseudo 3-D movement by use of separately scrolling background elements. Line scrolling is not always used for parallax effects. A good example would be the "fire" (not haze) effect seen in many 16 bit games--Thunderforce 3, for example.


"Neither the NES or SMS have background layers, that was in the SNES, etc."

I understand that neither have hardware capabilities for layers, but obviously the SMS is versatile enough, or powerful enough, to achieve it in software.

"To explain why new SMS games can be better than the old NES ones is simple. Two reasons: 1) companies usually won't put more effort into their games than they need to, until other companies come out with more impressive stuff, in which case they'd need to improve their stuff to compete. Games were simpler then, so developers didn't have to put as much into them. 2) Do you know how much easier it is now to do the games? heh. With emulators, Windows and other GUIs, good bitmap editing software, fast PCs, efficient compilers--if they had the tools we have now, the NES and SMS games would be incredible!"

But I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about then, when the tools were NOT lightyears beyond the capabilities of the systems being used for. And I didn't say "new" SMS games vs. "old" NES games. I'm talking about a rough parity, either in age, development time, or simple parallel chronology! Why not take the most advanced NES game from 1993 or before (roughly the end of it's life) and compare to the most advanced SMS game from 1993? It would actually to more fair to put a three year offset between the two, but even limited to 93, I'd be satisfied that SMS far outshone anything produced on NES.

Given the immense number of developers working on NES vs. the pittance on SMS (worldwide, even), and the dominance of NES and the competition bred from that fact, you would think that NES would have produced imagery that would have put SMS to shame. Even your speculation about companies and their lazy work ethic (regarding innovation) confirms this. NES is the arena where everyone was fighting for the $$$, where everyone was trying to outdo each other. So where is the supreme SMS killer?


"As for the peak of NES outshining the SMS, you'll see soon enough, when I release my ultimate homebrew NES game, heh."


I'm all for you and I think that's cool that you're working on such a project, but in the framework of this debate I ask: Why should I have to wait at all? If NES is indeed a more powerful machine, then a suitable example of your contention should be readily available among the commercial releases. Don't tell me I have to depend on a decade + of advances in dev tools and techniques to provide such an example.

1993: SMS vs. NES.

Go!

[NintendoMan]

This is like comparing PSX and Saturn, or PSX and DC, which would probably get the same response out of some of you. For some reason, collectors just love things that aren't mainstream. PSX has a much better library than either system, yet people are out there that will swear up and down that the Sega system's are better. I'll never understand this...

-Hitman-

That's exact. It is like comparing the PSX to the Saturn.

I mean of course everyone is going to like whichever system better that they grew up on.
But when comparing sales, games, etc. side by side; The NES COMPLETELY BLOWS the SMS out of the damn water. There is NO comparison at all.

Now I like the SMS for some of its games (Don't really have much gametime on this system, very sad being the SEGA fan I am), but if I went back in the day not one of my damn friends even knew what the hell the SMS was or is today even.

NES all the way!! (For Me :) )

[Dr. Morbis]

Wavelflack said:

So where is the supreme SMS killer?
It's called Super Mario Bros. It came out in 1985.
Specs, schmecs - it's all about the games man!

[Ed Oscuro]

But when comparing sales, games, etc. side by side; The NES COMPLETELY BLOWS the SMS out of the damn water. There is NO comparison at all.
No...when comparing games side by side, the SMS wins. That assumes that there's a game to compare with. You can compare Contra to, say, The Cyber Shinobi, but calling that a "side by side" comparison is misleading. If you want to compare NES games to their SMS counterparts, go for it. If not, I won't stop you - but it's a bit frustrating for people to look at the company that lost out because it generated nearly all its best hits entirely by itself (for example: "Reprogrammed by Sega," when was the last time you saw that on a Capcom or Konami port for the NES?), didn't insist on taking half ownership of FDS titles, and didn't use an anticompetitive business strategy.

Strangely enough, people look at the Italian Dictator (to paraphrase the book of poetry) and think "wow, those guys have us in their thoughts...they're so friendly, unlike those SEGA wankers who were busy screaming in your ear all the time."

I don't mind the fact that we've got a bunch of highly stylized five-color sprite games on the little gray box, but the SMS deserved better.

[NintendoMan]

But when comparing sales, games, etc. side by side; The NES COMPLETELY BLOWS the SMS out of the damn water. There is NO comparison at all.
No...when comparing games side by side, the SMS wins. That assumes that there's a game to compare with. You can compare Contra to, say, The Cyber Shinobi, but calling that a "side by side" comparison is misleading. If you want to compare NES games to their SMS counterparts, go for it. If not, I won't stop you - but it's a bit frustrating for people to look at the company that lost out because it generated nearly all its best hits entirely by itself (for example: "Reprogrammed by Sega," when was the last time you saw that on a Capcom or Konami port for the NES?), didn't insist on taking half ownership of FDS titles, and didn't use an anticompetitive business strategy.

Strangely enough, people look at the Italian Dictator (to paraphrase the book of poetry) and think "wow, those guys have us in their thoughts...they're so friendly, unlike those SEGA wankers who were busy screaming in your ear all the time."

I don't mind the fact that we've got a bunch of highly stylized five-color sprite games on the little gray box, but the SMS deserved better.

OK. I think I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that if you took an nes game that is similar to a sms game? But still even if you did that, the NES has hundreds of more games.

Well, I don't consider my 2 cents that important because as mentioned above, I don't have as much playing time on the games and system itself on the SMS. But I do know that the NES just has way too many "Great" games to even compare. (but keep in mind that the NES is my fav. system, so I am biased) :D

[Ed Oscuro]

OK. I think I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that if you took an nes game that is similar to a sms game? But still even if you did that, the NES has hundreds of more games.
Yes - there's both arguments, in a nutshell.

And yeah, I had to throttle the urge to say something about you being biased ;D In all seriousness, that's not so big an issue. Just trying to get the word out about the SMS, that's all.

[anagrama]

Show me a single NES game that is fit to lick the shoes of Power Strike II.

[Raccoon Lad]

And here's a couple special screens from Power Strike 2, just to help illustrate it's awesomeness:
http://kelesis.free.fr/hp/compile/powerst2/op/optionthumb.png
http://kelesis.free.fr/hp/compile/powerst2/end/end_nail.png
http://kelesis.free.fr/hp/compile/powerst2/end/omake4nail.png

[Quickclaw]

Any S

[Jasoco]

Any SWhat?

[Dr. Morbis]

Quickclaw wrote:
Any S
What?
It's synonymous with the letters N - E - S

[DreamTR]

The people that were talking about the SMS being more powerful than the NES must have been smoking too much crack down the street or something. It's pretty obvious that the SMS is limited in many more ways than the NES ever could be. Some of that system's greatest gameplay graphical achievements (I am talking gameplay, not still pics like Power Strike 2) include R-Type, which flickered everywhere madly, and Phantasy Star, which was probably the best game on the system. You can not compare Zelda II and Super Mario Bros 2/3 to Alex Kidd. It's not even right. There is nothing on the SMS that is even remotely close in terms of being "better" than the NES in any aspect except for being able to play different games. These are not necessarily better, they are just different. Granted Space Harrier is pretty damned awesome on the SMS, and I spent loads of time playing that and even Miracle Warriors does not mean I have lost my noggin and thought it was better.

Can you honestly say that SMS music is even better than any Sunsoft game's music? Blaster Master, Fester's Quest, Journey to Silius, Ufouria, Mr. Gimmick...those bring a tear to your eye....the NES was THE arcade system at the time. all those VS. games now with exact pixel counterparts (not gameplay) ? That was pretty nifty.

Also, that guy that said PS2 was better than XBOX? HAHAHAHHAH. Oh please. $150 for no hard drive, no network, cheaper DVD player, worse graphics, crappy laser. You have to be kidding. XBOX is the best system on the market hands down. You have to be oblivious to video games if you think otherwise.

[Bratwurst]

There's a reason I have like 8 SMS titles versus 96 NES cartridges, and most of them are the Euro exclusives. When a competent graphic artist was on board the Master System looked GREAT, check out Global Defense or Wonder Boy III, but the platform never seemed to escape a generic sense of audio and color palette. NES was way more flexible. Look at how a Capcom game differed in style from a Sunsoft game, etc.