How popular is the Genesis these days?

[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.

@ 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.

@ 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.

@ 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.