Video: Fan Manages to Port F-Zero to the Mega Drive

weird

Sega does what Ninten... also do.

That's odd but pretty funny.

But wait - if the Mega Drive was superior to the SNES, with 'blast processing' and whatnot, surely it would've been able to run an inferior SNES game with ease, without having to sacrifice the framerate and using low-res assets?

Or is it like the Wii U and PS360 ports?

The ground resolution takes a hit without mode 7, but still cool.

Wonder if Nintendo is taking notice that we all love "F-Zero" so much we are porting it to every console imaginable...

Would rather see a new F-Zero running on the Wii U or 3DS =p

Here's a Mega Drive/Genesis style Mute City cover to play in the background with the featured video: [youtube:_luisSouP4s]

That's actually rather cool. Not quite as cool as the original though.

@ToneDeath Thanks for the music too. That really helped.

@CB85 SNES was more powerful everywhere. The only edge Sega had was the clock speed, hence the "blast processing". Just some market exploitation.

@GhotiH
Yeah the SNES was generally more powerful than the Mega Drive (Genesis) in most tech specs:

http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~dherring/cgt141/project1/comparison.html

if you really get into it however the Mega Drive actually did do some things really well, like multiple scrolling planes and maintaining the smoothness and speed in certain sprite intensive games like shmups (there was less slowdown when the action got intense basically):

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/content/sega-genesis-vs-super-nintendo

Overall though, I'd still pick SNES above Mega Drive every time, although both are awesome machines.

@Kirk I checked how to include YouTube vids here.

I've also just found a video that already combines some of the mod footage with the remix here, and while I'm at it an alternative Mute City remix that sounds more like an earlier Mega Drive game here.

EDIT: Just realised the recreated track is supposed to be Big Blue. Oh well, you can easily find Genesis style covers of that tune too.

@ToneDeath
Cool

Further unrequited proof of how much more powerful the snes was, back in the days when nintendo appreciated that a consoles "power" carries a certain market appeal, instead of happy being the weakest every generation and seeing no correlation to sales numbers

@DESS-M-8 You might want to check your history. If there's a correlation, it's actually the opposite of what you seem to think.

Didn't Sega eventually officially work on an F-Zero title many years though, albeit for a Nintendo console?

@CB85 Mode 7... Let's say the SNES had a little weaker CPU, but a hell of a GPU compared to the Genesis (not precise, but will serve as an analogy)

@HopeNForever YES. They developed an arcade F-Zero game (AX) and a Gamecube game (GX).

Having played Core Design's awesome work on the Sega CD (Soulstar and others), as well as the vehicle levels of the Sega CD Batman Returns (and Batman and Robin, actually), there's no reason (albeit with perhaps a diminished color palette) that F-Zero couldn't be faithfully reproduced as a Sega CD game. With CD Audio. In the right hands, Sega's (actually superior, biaxial) hardware scaling and rotation could be very impressive (for it's time of course).

@DESS-M-8
No, no, not really...
The Master System and Game Gear where technical better machines than the NES and Gameboy. The SNES where perhaps a bit better than the Mega Drive, but that's it. Nintendo's dominance has always been about their great games, not better hardware.

@Pahvi
Sega's already admitted that "Blast Processing" was purely a marketing term that had zero basis in reality. They needed something they could say the Genesis had that the SNES didn't. They could have talked about the higher clock speed, but using technical terms like megahertz in a commercial aimed at kids and their technically-illiterate parents (especially in the 90s!) was a surefire way to lose your audience. So they invented the term Blast Processing because it sounded cool and technical at the same time. Basically, they just lied to the viewer, which honestly happens all the time in marketing so it shouldn't come as a surprise.

The Genesis has already been shown to be the inferior system in every important way. Anyone who has coded software for a variety of systems can tell you how little the MHz rating of the CPU matters compared to hardware features like the amount and speed of the RAM, the video chip's capabilities and specs, etc. SNES had the better hardware in every other case, and it clearly shows in the games that hit both systems.

Which only makes sense, when you think about it. The Genesis came out 2 years before the SNES, in 1988. They designed a system to beat out the NES, and they succeeded.

Gimme a moment to wipe the blood out of my ears...

@WaxxyOne actually, that's nonsense. The faster CPU in the Genesis conferred a distinct edge in sheer sprite manipulation--you simply do not see bosses like those in Gunstar Heroes, Contra Hard Corps, etc. Those multi-jointed spritemares simply could not run on the cripplingly-slow CPU powering the SNES, regardless of its superiority in other areas.

(The same can be seen in shoot 'em ups on both platforms where, even though the SNES could manipulate more sprites on paper, the reality was that you paid the price in massive slowdown or had to sacrifice raster effects and background layers to do it--Compile's MUSHA versus Space Megaforce is a prime example of the latter. Same company, but the latter is vastly inferior, technically, to the former.)

@GhotiH The Megadrive had a much better cpu and ram. (Reason why e.g Contra : Hard Corps is much better than Contra 3). And for certain genres slowdown is by comparison a none issue on the MD.

@CB85 It is pretty impressive considering the Genesis is running this straight off it's own hardware. The SNES couldn't run the game. It had to put a secondary processor inside the game cartridge. This is why SNES games were sometimes $70-$90. The hardware was weak, so Nintendo put additional hardware inside of the game cartridges. The Genesis came out a lot earlier than the SNES, but it still smoked it. The only clear advantage the SNES had was a larger color pallet.

@WaxxyOne The processor was very important actually. Take Street Fighter 2 for example. If you play that game competitively, then the SNES version is completely out of the question. The slow down breaks the game. If processing power wasn't important then Nintendo wouldn't have had to play catch up by adding co-processors inside the game packs. The truth is, Genesis could do all those scaling and rotation effects nativly that Nintendo liked to brag about, but it's system couldn't even do on its own. The only clear advantage the SNES had spec wise, was the amount of colors on screen.

@CB85 look up the comparisons on the web. It's really interesting to compare, honestly it's amazing what they did with such weak systems...

@dres

Yes yes yes really. Over a decade of nintendos marketing was based on its power superiority, (snes and n64) that was until Yamauchi handed over to iwata during the transitional gamecube period where miyamoto seemed to be quite a driving force. Then it all came about being different and under powered. Needless to say the wii was a laughing stock for the last 3 years of its life, kicking and screaming till its way overdue successor was launched and it was......... Even more underpowered than the wii in relative terms. If a wii was essentially a tweaked gamecube more on par with ps2 and that was a joke compared to ps3, you'd have thought the successor would out perform a ps3 easily to slot in with the next gen it would fall in with due to its release date? No. Just as everyone has forgotten about and stopped caring about wii and just about squeezed every last resource out of the 7 year old ps3, nintendo release the wii u that is comparable to...... PS3? Jesus Christ they never learn. Yamauchi drove nintendo like a shogun, iwata seems content to turn nintendo away from gaming almost.
Software needs hardware. The software is excellent but will ultimately hit a ceiling way earlier than it should. I wholey agree graphics are not paramount, but hardware is more than a GPU and if your hardware is out of date before it even hits the shop shelf, then how can you expect the software and the support of general consumers? Something Yamauchi understood during the 90's when nintendo was king. Something iwata defies and thinks a fad controllers success will win his team endless praise. The man, like you, is wrong.

Cool hack, too bad the blast processing delivers an ear pain though.

@Dr_Corndog yes, all nintendo weak hardware has outsold. Gamecube and wii u? Sold balls.
Wii was an anomaly cause it luckily struck with a casual market For a 3 year craze. That won't happen again and that saved iwata. If he's driving nintendo 7, expect it to fail.

Miyamoto should have taken over from Yamauchi.

Glad to see SNES still reigns supreme.

I love how everyone thinks they know who actually makes the decisions at Nintendo. It might seem like Iwata but I reckon it's a bunch of manatees. At the very least I think the lack of hardware power is a combination of people within Nintendo who veto anything they don't like the sound of rather than Iwata being the driving force behind making weak consoles.

I'd like to seem him go though because their hardware isn't as good as it should be, they sit on good IP, milk the mediocre stuff and refuse to market anything properly.

@DESS-M-8 @CB85
Miyamota is just as stuck in the past as Iwata. He was aversive to a lot of "next-generation" ideas. They need someone entirely new to break the trend of traditional ideas from Nintendo.

Also for those "seriously" criticizing how F-Zero looks on the mega drive as seen above, remember this is a rom hack of the SNES version. If it was a full pledged game using Genesis hardware, a lot more can be done (except the sound which always sucks). Heck even this hack is stated to be far from completion

I love how the comment section turned into a SNES vs. Genesis debate

@ReshiramZekrom Reminds me of the kids that use to argue about the SNES vs the Genesis days people talk about.
I will still play the Genesis over the SNES any day though even though I have more nostalgia for the SNES.

@CB85 The SNES had a vastly inferior CPU. Pretty much all SNES carts contained various chips, co processors and the ilk - this was a design decision by Nintendo to keep the SNES competitively price, worked out well in the end.

The Genesis can do better than this, like it or not. It may not have transparency like the Super Nintendo, but it has been proven that Genesis can run Mode 7 with even better resolution. The sound cards are a matter of preference, tho.

Sega did some clever things with sprites and layered backgrounds that had a 3D look, but it could not do SNES-like scaling and rotation without the CD attachment.

I recall seeing a similar video where someone ported Star Fox over to the genesis/Mega Drive. It was just as underwhelming XD

@HopeNForever Yes they did, and it was F-Zero AX (arcade) and F-Zero GX (GameCube)

My 16-bit system was a Genesis. And while my STREET FIGHTER ran amazingly and CONTRA was spectacular, I was still envious of the rich color palette, rotational effects, and sound capabilities which the SNES had to offer. It may just be apples to oranges, but after awhile I got tired of all the explosions of Genesis games sounding like snare drums. I will say, I do like most cross-platform releases better on the Genesis, though. The colors look darker. (EWJ on Sega FTW!!!)

@darthllama is that why mortal kombat looked so much inferior on mega drive? Street fighter II? And every other multi format title? All made by professional developers dedicated to each format? I think defending the mega drive based on power is the most uneven footing you could be planted on

@DESS-M-8 Dude, just stop.

First of all, there were only three consoles where Nintendo emphasised raw horsepower; SNES, Nintendo 64 and Gamecube - and only one of them outsold the competition. The rest of them abided by Gunpei Yokoi's 'lateral thinking of withered technology'; particularly the handheld consoles. Fact: The majority of Nintendo's most successful machines were technologically weaker.

Second, there is most definitely a smaller gap between Wii U and PS4/Xbox One, than there was between Wii and PS3/Xbox 360. All three current consoles are HD this time around, and the visuals for Sony and Microsoft's offerings have been seen as disappointing. You say Nintendo uses outdated hardware? Newsflash - ALL consoles use outdated hardware. This is also a fact.

Finally, Iwata and Miyamoto are behind the times? I always have to laugh at such an absurd notion. Have you forgotten the Wii and DS? You know, the two consoles that uprooted the entire industry? What about Wii U and 3DS? Are you going to tell me that tablet-controllers and glasses-free 3D are the results of 'outdated' thinking? Whilst the ultra-conservative PS4 and Xbox One are somehow more innovative? Give me a break.

@Kage_88 Ha nice one - I have a WiiU and a PS4 as of Yet PS4 is till yet to impress me.. and no I do not cear for GFX I only realy cear for Gameplay that Nintendo mostly dilivers on.

@ReshiramZekrom It's like the 90's all over again

If it's true that the SNES appears superior over the genesis on almost aspect on the paper, in reality if you starting to get deeper in the technicals details you will discover how much the specs are overrated for the SNES and that the Sega Genesis is superior in many aspects.
Here is some examples :

• max resolution : 512x448 (SNES) vs 320x448 (Genesis)
  Reality: 99% of SNES game use 256x224 where 90% of genesis game uses 320x224
• 4 scrolling plan (SNES) vs 2 scrolling plans (Genesis)
  Reality: in same colors and scrolling conditions the SNES is limited to 2 scrolling plans as is the Genesis.
• 128 sprites (SNES) vs 80 sprites (Genesis)
  Reality, the slow SNES cpu would never allow to handle as much sprites, in reality you rarely goes over 40 sprites on screen while on genesis you can get close reach the 80 limit, thanks to the better CPU !
• max sprite size: 64x64 (SNES) vs 32x32 (Genesis)
  Actually the SNES video processor does allow 64x64 sprite but you never use them for many reason (VRAM bandwidth, sprite scanline limit) so it's totally useless... in reality the Genesis has the edge here because it allow to display sprites of any size between 8x8 to 32x32 (in step of 8 pixels) where the SNES only allow to use 2 sprites size at same time and using square sprite only.

And that is, without speaking of the awful memory organization of the SNES and the crawling over dated CPU. The Genesis 68000 is so much powerful... that's the reason we can have software rendered mode 7.
The reals advantages of the SNES is the more modern graphic chip allowing more colors on screen and hardware effects as mode 7, transparency... also the sample based sound chip allowing sort of orchestral musics but except this I sincerely think the Genesis is better on almost every others aspects (better design, better sprites and scrolling capabilities, more flexible sound system and far better CPU).

@DESS-M-8
Did I say the Genesis was superior to the SNES? Did I say Genesis games are superior to SNES titles? Did I ever defend the "power" of the Genesis? I just implied that the game we saw in this video could look better/natural if it was developed based on the Genesis hardware rather than a straight Rom conversion that is based on different hardware, which is true. Even the person doing the conversion said as much. That doesn't mean it'll blow us away or be superior to the SNES game. Just that it could be a bit better than that short video that was saw. Reading comprehension isn't that hard.

@Kage_88 yes. I am saying they use outdated technology. being edantic and saying all consoles use outdated technology as your "newsflash" is just desperate and irritating. By that logic even the latest alienware desktop is old technology.
It is way underpowered. Fact. Niche new technology don't make up for that, especially when not implemented.
Not sure why you're so cross. I rate nintendo, I play nintendo, above all else. I just think they keep making bad calls. Hinting with NX confirms this.
Last time I checked, having my own thoughts weren't illegal, so don't take such offense when my views arent your views, the world is full of differing opinions, get used to it. If you get so defensive and agreived over every small matter you'll be dead from a heart attack before hitting 50

One thing about the Genesis / Mega Drive hardware alone is that Sega had created the system completely from existing "off the shelf" parts. Considering that mash-up, the system was already obsolete before it even was unveiled let alone making it to store shelves.

Many developers that had spent enough time with the system had produced some truly amazing visuals that not only had brought many effects that required the Super FX2 chip for sprite scaling and rotation. Something that had already been done with the Genesis alone. Games such as Red Zone had amazing effects all done using no additional hardware and near the end of the systems life. Games such as Ranger-X, Vectorman, and even Toy Story of all things with it pushing the barrier of on screen colors and a real time 3D maze level really showed that the system had quite a bit of power to perform such effects in software at no loss of speed. Batman & Robin may have had awful audio but all the graphical effects were there to show just what the system could do in capable hands.

Seeing this tech demo is pretty amazing for it not to be coming from any development team which I bet could double the resolution of what's shown here.

I for one find this F-Zero tech demo very impressive for the Sega Genesis / Mega Drive. Especially considering the same game on the SNES was using a custom graphics chip and separate sound chip offloading the demand on the CPU and started it's life as a tech demo itself for the Super Famicom.

I just wish a new entry in the F-Zero series would come to be. Something that rivals F-Zero GX at least. That game bleeds style.