Sega Genesis vs Super Nintendo

[Clippersfan86]

Back on topic though.... as I said I prefer Sega due to their innovative hardware and will always defend their brilliance. But due to the sheer volume of good, classic games on Super Nintendo you have to give it the all around edge.

[kentatm]

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.

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?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KykDW...eature=related

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 Nintendo hardware is impressive.

I'm sorry but you just made an incredibly bad comparison. The Sonic game was just a simple port. They didn't attempt to do much with upgrading the graphics at all it got tagged in reviews b/c of it.

Again, the Gamecube is much more powerful than the Dreamcast. There isnt even a question about it.

[Clippersfan86]

I'm sorry but you just made an incredibly bad comparison. The Sonic game was just a simple port. They didn't attempt to do much with upgrading the graphics at all.

Again, the Gamecube is much more powerful than the Dreamcast. There isnt even a question about it.

Same way that Sony claimed their PS3 had 10 times the potential of the 360 or w/e and bragged about the edge in hardware and now here we are 6 years later or w/e and Sony STILL hasn't created a gap hardware wise. In fact most people I know feel 360 has a graphics/processing edge in most games. Nintendo had much more potential with a 3 year newer system than Dreamcast.... but in real every day performance Dreamcast matched up just fine and when you factor in that it came out 3 years earlier.. it's simply amazing.

Also don't forget the PS2 has significantly better specs than the Dreamcast and Dreamcast still looked better in most multi platform games.

[kentatm]

Same way that Sony claimed their PS3 had 10 times the potential of the 360 or w/e and bragged about the edge in hardware and now here we are 6 years later or w/e and Sony STILL hasn't created a gap hardware wise. Nintendo had much more potential with a 3 year newer system than Dreamcast.... but in real every day performance Dreamcast matched up just fine.

are you kidding me?

holy shit you are really fanboying it up.

The Dreamcast does NOT match up. It literally can't b/c of the hardware inside the system.

And while the PS3 is ahead of the 360 in terms of raw power, often that advantage is mitigated b/c companies want games to be easily made for cross platform play. Since the 360 has been the market leader for most of this gen and is easier to develop for, multi-platform games are usually designed with it and its limitations in mind first. When developers actually go all out, the PS3 does have a noticeable bump over the 360.

[Clippersfan86]

are you kidding me?

holy shit you are really fanboying it up.

The Dreamcast does NOT match up. It literally can't b/c of the hardware inside the system.

And while the PS3 is ahead of the 360 in terms of raw power, often that advantage is mitigated b/c companies want games to be easily made for cross platform play. Since the 360 has been the market leader for most of this gen and is easier to develop for, multi-platform games are usually designed with it and its limitations in mind first. When developers actually go all out, the PS3 does have a noticeable bump over the 360.

We are talking about how a game looks and processes right? Dreamcast matches up. I showed one video which you disregarded with an excuse but your biggest lie was saying how far apart they are on 3D. If that's the case why does ANY 3D game or game in general look better on the Dreamcast? Just doesn't make sense and if you're just going to cherry pick this is going to go on for days and it's not worth my time.

I'm not comparing paper specs. I'm comparing how the games actually looked rendered and how smoothly they ran etc. Sega is a champ and as I said the fact that Nintendo has to come out 2-3 years later to match the performance of Sega proves my point.

Here's actual gameplay. The guy making the video said he got identical results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBxjsmndRlM

[Clippersfan86]

The Gamecube will only be remembered for the disk technology. Other than that it was a very very forgettable system where as the Dreamcast is a legend. Innovative VMU storage, ahead of it's time hardware performance. Incredibly good games and not too many "bad" games in comparison to Nintendo and other systems. On top of that the system is crazy reliable. I banged my DC around so much and had it in storage multiple times without a single issue where as I've had Nintendo's, Xbox's and Sony's all break down on me, never had a Sega do the same. Although if I remember correctly the Genesis did overheat often.

[kentatm]

We are talking about how a game looks and processes right? Dreamcast matches up. I showed one video which you disregarded with an excuse but your biggest lie was saying how far apart they are on 3D. If that's the case why does ANY 3D game or game in general look better on the Dreamcast? Just doesn't make sense and if you're just going to cherry pick this is going to go on for days and it's not worth my time.

I'm not comparing paper specs. I'm comparing how the games actually looked rendered and how smoothly they ran etc. Sega is a champ and as I said the fact that Nintendo has to come out 2-3 years later to match the performance of Sega proves my point.

Here's actual gameplay. The guy making the video said he got identical results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBxjsmndRlM

Ok, first off, you didnt even read what I wrote correctly.

I said the SATURN could not do 3D very well compared to the N64. Again, that is just a straight up fact. N64 was designed with 3D tech in mind. Saturn was not. End of story.


second, you are comparing quick and cheap ports. That is not a good comparison. That is like comparing the graphics from the Wii version of No More Heroes to the 360 version and claiming the Wii is just as powerful b/c they look about the same.

The Dreamcast can not match the GC when both are pushed to their limits. It just cant.


And no, 3D games do NOT look better in general on Dreamcast. You are just making shit up now.

[Clippersfan86]

Ok, first off, you didnt even read what I wrote correctly.

I said the SATURN could not do 3D very well compared to the N64. Again, that is just a straight up fact. N64 was designed with 3D tech in mind. Saturn was not. End of story.


second, you are comparing quick and cheap ports. That is not a good comparison. That is like comparing the graphics from the Wii version of No More Heroes to the 360 version and claiming the Wii is just as powerful b/c they look about the same.

The Dreamcast can not match the GC when both are pushed to their limits. It just cant.


And no, 3D games do NOT look better in general on Dreamcast. You are just making shit up now.

Agree that the Dreamcast had less potential (it only lasted two years and came out 3 years earlier ). Never disagreed with that. Just the games we did see in the two years Dreamcast was out vs the first year or two of Gamecube were comparable. Let's get back to the topic though because I feel guilty for derailing the thread. I'll repeat my answer for the OP. Thanks for pointing out that I confused Saturn and Genesis though.

Super Nintendo wins this battle with Genesis because of the sheer amount of classic, good games that we all played growing up. I remember tons of nostalgic, fantastic games where as with the Genesis I remember Sonic, Soul Caliber and Echo The Dolphin pretty much.

[kentatm]

Agree that the Dreamcast had less potential (it only lasted two years and came out 3 years earlier ). Never disagreed with that. Just the games we did see in the two years Dreamcast was out vs the first year or two of Gamecube were comparable.

You said the Dreamcast had superior hardware which is wrong.

You said it took a dump on the PS2 graphically which is also wrong.

And even when you take just the early years, both the GC and PS2 outperformed the Dreamcast when developers actually pushed the systems.


The only two times Sega has held hardware superiority over a Nintendo system were with the Master System and the Game Gear. I'm of course not counting the Sega Cd or 32X in that discussion considering those were expensive peripherals that received little support.

[Clippersfan86]

You said the Dreamcast had superior hardware which is wrong.

You said it took a dump on the PS2 graphically which is also wrong.

And even when you take just the early years, both the GC and PS2 outperformed the Dreamcast when developers actually pushed the systems.


The only two times Sega has held hardware superiority over a Nintendo system were with the Master System and the Game Gear. I'm of course not counting the Sega Cd or 32X in that discussion considering those were expensive peripherals that received little support.

You should know by now I like to hype up and dramatize things with exaggerated words. Just like when I call a player elite and everybody gets bent out of shape. I thought all things considered Dreamcast>PS2 but "take a dump" is an big exaggeration obviously. For the comparison to be fair though you'd have to compare just the first cycle of games for the PS2, Gamecube to the Dreamcast for the reasons I already specified. Obviously later in the generation when PS2, GC was pushed to the limits it kills Dreamcast.

[kentatm]

You should know by now I like to hype up and dramatize things with exaggerated words. Just like when I call a player elite and everybody gets bent out of shape. I thought all things considered Dreamcast>PS2 but "take a dump" is an big exaggeration obviously. For the comparison to be fair though you'd have to compare just the first cycle of games for the PS2, Gamecube to the Dreamcast for the reasons I already specified. Obviously later in the generation when PS2, GC was pushed to the limits it kills Dreamcast.

when you say a system has better hardware there is no such thing as fair.

it either does or doesnt.

I loved the Dreamcast but compared to the other systems of that gen it was underpowered.

It was basically just Sega's arcade tech crammed into a tiny box. That is partly why it was so good for arcade based games.

[Clippersfan86]

when you say a system has better hardware there is no such thing as fair.

it either does or doesnt.

I loved the Dreamcast but compared to the other systems of that gen it was underpowered.

It was basically just Sega's arcade tech crammed into a tiny box. That is partly why it was so good for arcade based games.

PS2 could always boast the better specs but compare any game H2H and find videos and you'll see Dreamcast always had the smoother, clearer graphics. You seem to think Dreamcast hit max potential in two years when it clearly didn't. The same way that Sony, Nintendo improved graphics over the years Dreamcast would have as well obviously. Underpowered on paper maybe but as somebody who supposedly loved his Dreamcast you're really twisting the facts. I owned a PS2 from the first week it was released around Christmas and that thing was INCREDIBLY hard to get.

I also got the Dreamcast pretty much on launch. Having played both for and insane amount of time... I can say confidently that right out of the gate the Dreamcast>PS2 but after years of development of the games PS2 got much better looking. Dreamcast didn't get that chance so stop talking like it was maxed out already. PS2 ended up better by the mid-end of it's life cycle but in the beginning Dreamcast was better.

[kentatm]

PS2 could always boast the better specs but compare any game H2H and find videos and you'll see Dreamcast always had the smoother, clearer graphics. You seem to think Dreamcast hit max potential in two years when it clearly didn't. The same way that Sony, Nintendo improved graphics over the years Dreamcast would have as well obviously. Underpowered on paper maybe but as somebody who supposedly loved his Dreamcast you're really twisting the facts. I owned a PS2 from the first week it was released around Christmas and that thing was INCREDIBLY hard to get.

I also got the Dreamcast pretty much on launch. Having played both for and insane amount of time... I can say confidently that right out of the gate the Dreamcast>PS2 but after years of development of the games PS2 got much better looking. Dreamcast didn't get that chance so stop talking like it was maxed out already.

of course I dont think the Dreamcast was maxed out when Sega pulled the plug.

I'm not sure ANY system aside from the NES or Atari 2600 ever got pushed to its absolute fullest.

and no, I disagree that the Dreamcast always had smoother, cleaner graphics.

[AlphaWolf24]

Sega Genesis was the bomb..IMO way better then any Nintendo system (outside of he NES)

EA sports Lakers vs Celtics..

Golden Axe....

Sonic

Madden 91

Genesis merked Nintendo in the 2nd round...

[Clippersfan86]

of course I dont think the Dreamcast was maxed out when Sega pulled the plug.

I'm not sure ANY system aside from the NES or Atari 2600 ever got pushed to its absolute fullest.

and no, I disagree that the Dreamcast always had smoother, cleaner graphics.

That's just the general consensus. Look at videos on Youtube and read comments. Look at polls comparing early PS2 games that were on Dreamcast as well. You'll see it's not just me who feels that way. The point here for me is how much do you value potential and big numbers in comparison to how these games ACTUALLY look and how smooth they run?

Are you into cars? I am and can find similarities. You can find many examples of cars that have significantly more power but are slower or perform worse due to factors such as gearing, computer tech and even weight etc. Yes PS2+Gamecube>Dreamcast on paper but I never felt that way actually playing all the systems.