Had both, but the SNES was far better. Nobody mentioned Super Metroid?
Printable View
Had both, but the SNES was far better. Nobody mentioned Super Metroid?
Sega will always be superior to it's counterparts of each generation in terms of hardware. The Genesis shits on the Super Nintendo graphics wise. The only thing that Nintendo has over Sega throughout the years is more support and games. Longer life of the console= more games and more support= more development of games.
So if you just want a variety of games go Super Nintendo. If you want quality of system and the better machine go Genesis.
[QUOTE=DCL]genesis got nothing to top legend of zelda: link to the past[/QUOTE]
Actually it does and it was called Crusader of Centy:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq7fDSYeM84&feature=player_detailpage#t=183s"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq7fDSYeM84&feature=player_detailpage#t=183s[/URL]
It was obviously lifting from Zelda, but it was superior in many ways.
and there was also a game called Beyond Oasis which was really good:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lDevyejFoB8#t=189s"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lDevyejFoB8#t=189s[/URL]
[QUOTE=BuffaloBill][IMG]http://agpvegas.com/agpstore/images/images_big/tmnt4snes.jpg[/IMG]
best video game ever made.[/QUOTE]
I bought this game for the XBox360 a few years ago and it's still quite enjoyable. It's a fun one to play with friends.
I have fond memories of my dad taking me and my brother to an arcade when we were younger and him allowing me to play Turtles in Time for what had to be more than an hour. I don't think I beat it though. But later that year, at a big family part held in a Holiday Inn, I got my revenge and I beat it on SNES with some step relative kid I didn't know.
both were great but the SNES takes it for me
[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]Sega will always be superior to it's counterparts of each generation in terms of hardware. [B][SIZE="5"]The Genesis shits on the Super Nintendo graphics wise.[/SIZE] [/B]The only thing that Nintendo has over Sega throughout the years is more support and games. Longer life of the console= more games and more support= more development of games.
So if you just want a variety of games go Super Nintendo. If you want quality of system and the better machine go Genesis.[/QUOTE]
umm. no.
you dont know what you are talking about at all.
the only thing that the Genesis had over the SNES was a slightly faster processor. Otherwise the SNES whipped it terms of graphics.
[QUOTE=Rake2204]
On the flip side, my cousin had a SNES and that's usually where we got our time in with Street Fighter, Smash TV, Super Mario World, and [B]World Series Baseball.[/B] I can still put a lot of time into Smash TV, particularly when I go the infinite lives route (it was a tough game).
[/QUOTE]
World Series Baseball was on the Genesis.
Are you thinking about Ken Griffey Junior Baseball? That was the #1 baseball game on SNES for most people.
[QUOTE=kentatm]\
umm. no.
you dont know what you are talking about at all.
the only thing that the Genesis had over the SNES was a slightly faster processor. Otherwise the SNES whipped it terms of graphics.[/QUOTE]
lol i was going to make the exact same post. but yeah, you only have to play a few games to see that the SNES looked way better. and it should - it came out like 2 years later. it also had better sound.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDAhgTEJ47Q[/url]
donkey kong, super mario world, link to the past>
[QUOTE=kentatm]\
umm. no.
you dont know what you are talking about at all.
the only thing that the Genesis had over the SNES was a slightly faster processor. Otherwise the SNES whipped it terms of graphics.
World Series Baseball was on the Genesis.
Are you thinking about Ken Griffey Junior Baseball? That was the #1 baseball game on SNES for most people.[/QUOTE]
I was confusing Genesis with Saturn. Saturn took a dump on the 64 graphics wise and the Dreamcast did the same to the PS2 and Gamecube. In general though considering they usually came out a couple years before Nintendo, Sega's hardware is more impressive. So yes I know what I'm talking about. The general point stands.
Sega= Better hardware.
Nintendo= Better games, more support.
I prefer Sega because of some of the off the wall games they had and their systems have always been so innovative compared to Nintendo and Sony.
Actraiser was one of my favs back then.
It still blows me away that this was a launch title.
I was super pissed when they got rid of the city building portion in the sequel.
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/42/ActRaiser_Coverart.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]I was confusing Genesis with Saturn. Saturn took a dump on the 64 graphics wise and the Dreamcast did the same to the PS2. In general though considering they usually came out a couple years before Nintendo, Sega's hardware is more impressive. So yes I know what I'm talking about. The general point stands.
Sega= Better hardware.
Nintendo= Better games, more support.
I prefer Sega because of some of the off the wall games they had and their systems have always been so innovative compared to Nintendo and Sony.[/QUOTE]
again you are wrong and know not of what you speak.
The Saturn had too much old tech in it and could not do many of the things an N64 could. It could not handle 3D stuff very well at all.
and LOfrigginL saying that the Dreamcast was better graphically than a PS2. I don't even know why you bring that up since PS2 is a Sony product. The Nintendo system of that gen, the Gamecube, wrecks the Dreamcast in graphical capabilities.
I loved my Dreamcast but it does not compare.
This isnt me being a fanboy. I'm silver spoon child and I had all of these systems.
[QUOTE=kentatm]I'm silver spoon child and I had all of these systems.[/QUOTE] bastard
[QUOTE=Bucket_Nakedz]bastard[/QUOTE]
:lol
I know, I'm a little ****er.
I did mow a lot of lawns though so it wasn't just my parents hooking me up.
only had a Sega Genesis so that gets my vote
[QUOTE=kentatm]again you are wrong and know not of what you speak.
The Saturn had too much old tech in it and could not do many of the things an N64 could. It could not handle 3D stuff very well at all.
and LOfrigginL saying that the Dreamcast was better graphically than a PS2. I don't even know why you bring that up since PS2 is a Sony product. Even then, the Gamecube wrecks the Dreamcast in graphical capabilities.
I loved my Dreamcast but it does not compare.
This isnt me being a fanboy. I'm silver spoon child and I had all of these systems.[/QUOTE]
So much bad information.
Here is a video comparison side by side. Dreamcast on the left, Gamecube on the right. Nintendo came out 2+ years later and the only difference graphics wise is Cube is darker. Nintendo always had the advantage of 2 extra years of development and still couldn't create a gap hardware wise. "Dreamcast has better shading, lighting, smoother frame rate and better quality sound. In the Gamecube version, the cutscenes are a bit choppier, have darker textures and slightly muffled sound." That's what a player who has both systems for this game says.
BTW this is a fully 3d game... so break down the video and tell me why the Gamecube clearly has more 3D power or capability?
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KykDWyRprnM&feature=related[/url]
Nintendo= better games and support
Sega= Better hardware
I'll keep repeating it if you need. Coming out two years before every Nintendo system and still being able to match or beat in some cases Nintendo hardware is impressive.