UK Media Outlet The Guardian Aims To Settle The 16-bit Console War Forever

Right, because opinions are facts.

There is no winner, they were both amazing and each had their strengths and weaknesses. The winners were us the gamers who were lucky enough to live through that era.

Really its both because where one had a shortcoming the other picked uo.

Two piece of tech like that, that complement each other so well, is never going to happen again.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses. At the end of the day for me Snes slightly take the crown with the games that they had especially towards the end of it's life thanks to Rare!

It's all about the games really.

I'm die-hard Nintendo, but would buy a Mega Drive over a PlayStation or Xbox any day.

I grew up on Team Sega, but it's obvious to me now that the SNES was better than the Megadrive, for all the Square and Enix titles alone, let alone the first-party stuff. Nothing wrong with Phantasy Star or Shining Force, but...

I agree with others on here. Not really a winner/loser for those of us who enjoyed gaming during that period. The SNES probably edges out the Genesis with its overall library of games but I owned both back then and loved them both equally.

I agree with what others have said. You can declare either side the winner in some way depending on perspective. SNES won in total sales and owned Japan, but Sega took a massive chunk of market share away from them which was no small feat. Same goes when comparing specs, as that's not as clear cut as many assume. In the end, the most important thing is the game library. Based on that, the Mega Drive/Genesis is easily the winner for me as I prefer its style of games. I understand why people would have the opposite opinion. Each system had certain genres covered and I'm more of a scrolling shooter fan than an RPG fan, though I found Phantasy Star 4 to be wonderful. With that said, I do enjoy SNES games, but I find I have to be really picky and can't trust reviews as much as I can for earlier systems.

Yeah yeah yeah 'the only winner was us the gamers', but after owning both I can tell you that the SNES library has aged a lot better in the long run. Plus the Mega CD actually made the Mega Drive worse somehow.

I feel the SNES would be the winner. There's 100 games I'd love to play on there vs the Genesis's 12. Most 3rd party games look, sound, and occasionally play better on SNES, but it came out 2 years after the Genesis so that makes sense. I prefer SNES controllers too. I'm glad to have experienced both though. Sonic's Sega collection for X360 and PS3 is also a much better option than the AtGames plugnplay console. Its only missing a few great games like Gunstar Heroes, Castlevania Bloodlines, and Super Hang-on. The Golden Axe and Streets of Rage trilogies are infinitely mor fun than the Final Fight trilogy and the entire Sonic series has no comparison. Mario vs Sonic is apples and oranges.

I'll always be a SNES backer at heart due to it hosting some of the best titles ever released (Super Metroid, Link to the Past, Starfox, Mario World, Chrono Trigger to name but a few), yet I will not deny the Mega Drive was an arcade gamer's dream during the 4th Console Gen with the Thunderforce, Streets of Rage, Sonic, Shinobi, etc).

Literally it is all down to what genres of games you hold more dearly.

The Guardian?.........LMAO

What do they know? Anyway, the winner is the SNES.

Choosing a winner sounds a little ridiculous given the Mega Drive was doing better at one point but only in some territories along with other ups and downs between the two platforms. Surely the event would serve much better as purely a celebration of the consoles. A look back at the highlights etc. With interesting discussions from people who worked in the industry at the time.

Settles nothing, also given general media bias in any format has slid greatly into the toilet over the last 20 years or so now and this is being done in Europe where Nintendo was a pariah to a couple generations I'm not really holding out any hope for as (hehe Fox would put it) something fair or balanced. It's just going to be another stupid opinionated white washing done to gin up or piss off fans on the spectrum more so as it's a paid event.

Even if you're objective about the hardware in the period the Sega device was 2 years older and you could really hear and see it in many cases. Sure it was faster and allowed for some more speedy shooters, and most sports games (thanks to EA) gravitated there, but on the whole did it really stand out especially when similar hardware got thrown into the NeoGeo and made the Sega box look and sound pretty feeble?

Nintendo isn't off the hook either given the slow chip causing headaches off and on (mostly early) in its life and allowed for some less than stellar shooters, slowdown, flicker, but it made up for it with the eye/ear candy to mask that and a larger array of games and game variety despite in cases needed added chips which Sega mostly ignorantly strayed from other than their $100 bloated priced Virtua Racing(which I loved.)

It's all down to game taste, but put it to hardware it would be more obvious. There is no resolution and to take money from suckers looking for a verbal fight seems pretty weak.

A question I always wondered had the systems not come out nearly 2yrs apart would Sega have got much traction? They couldn't have run their lying smear campaign ad spots in the US on tv and in print. Nintendo delaying a year plus allowed the door to be open to abuse and people believing whatever they're told to believe in a pre-internet era where research wasn't easy.

Ristar is a game they should use for the debate of fac-I MEAN DEBATE OF OPINIONS!

It's a stalemate.

I wrote 60 pages on this subject in 2012 over the span of 8 articles. I hope you'll forgive a 1 1/2 page long comment that while insanely long for a comment is still an amazingly concise summary of those 60 pages!

Here we go!

The SNES had distinct hardware advantages and distinct disadvantages relative the Genesis and vice versa. And this is true across the board, graphics, sound, gameplay, everything. I think to attempt to definitively declare an absolute winner will not yield a satisfactory conclusion, and will probably leave just as much controversy in its wake as existed before - if not even more so, as one thing that I'm sure this will do is reignite the debate. I'm hoping very strongly that this panel will be wise enough to not attempt to create sensation by forcing a conclusion for winner.....when quite simply.....there isn't one....

That's not to say it's pointless to discuss the hardware, or that it's impossible to make distinctions between them including micro-proclamations ("better at X", "worse at Y"). In my opinion, comparative hardware studies from the 4th generation may well be the very single most interesting discussion in all of video game history - bar none! Add in PC Engine / Turbografx16 and things get even zestier! (I'll leave PCE out for the purposes of this comment, though).

So if my position is an ironclad commitment to an objective stalemate (draw, tie, wash....pick your term) between the two systems in terms of overall hardware, but that distinctions can - and SHOULD be made between them, what kind of distinctions would I draw? This:

I think we tend to treat the terms "more advanced" and "more powerful" as synonyms - or at least as inseparable propositions, as in "if it's more advanced, that means it's more powerful", or "if it's more powerful, that means it's more advanced." Well, I think the SNES be Genesis debate proves that the two are not necessarily inseparable after all as if I were to super-simplify, I think that the "advanced" / "powerful" divide is precisely where this debate comes down to. SNES is "more advanced" than Genesis, and Genesis is "more powerful" than SNES. And I think both assertions are incontrovertible. SNES uses more forward-thinking technologies, but skimps in raw power to keep price competitive, where Genesis doesn't go for anything flashy, but is a beast!

The results of this? Well, this is not a comprehensive list at all, but the major points are that SNES graphics are crisper, cleaner, more colorful, and support a number of special effects that Genesis didn't, such as transparency, and the full suite of "modes", including the world famous "mode 7". And the Genesis in return, ran in higher resolution, with larger, more detailed, more simultaneously plenteous sprites, and much more fluid, faster-paced animation. SNES visuals, one could argue, were more polished, but there was so much less going on in them, smaller, less detailed, more woodenly animated character and environment sprites, and moving at a more plodding pace at that. So, we see "more advanced" vs "more powerful" playing out here and holding each other to a draw.

As far as the sound, the SNES featured an 8-channel ADPCM sampler which was much more forward-thinking than the tag team of the 6-Channel FM synthesis chip and 4-channel PSG chips found in the Genesis - the latter one being a carryover from the 8-bit Sega Mastersystem. And it had it's definite advantages: a sampler can sample anything, string and orchestra sections, guitar and bass, even synths. It could go anywhere, be anything.....well, sorta. The SPC700 sampler chip itself wasn't that limited, but the rest of the system held it back. Between RAM and ROM limitations the system could really only traffic in really small, low bitrate samples, and then pair that with forced anti-aliasing on the SPC700, and a simply terrible reverb, what you ended up with was wooden and/or muffly and/or sizzly lo-fi sounds. It was like building sound out of legos. Despite the SPC700's channels being capable of more hi-fi sounds than the YM2612, because of all the other restrictions, the real-life results were actually the polar opppsite. Also, yes, the SNES had way more audio RAM than Genesis. But a sampler requires soooo much more memory than FM and PSG that SNES starves where Genesis doesn't. By contrast, Genesis was more limited to just what could be done with four sine-waves per channel over six channels, one of which could be sacrificed for a low-grade sampler channel, three square waves and a white noise channel. But it was completely unfettered in such pursuits. Besides, four-operator sine-based, eight algorithm FM is waaaaay more liberating and expressive than a lot of people think. In the right hands it could be used to amazing effect! In fact, in the hands of chiptune sceners in recent days, it's even succeeded in convincingly replicating SNES sampled sounds just using FM, and retaining the Genesis's advantages of being much more fluid, crisper, punchier, louder, fatter, more "raw", and "bigger" sounding! If making sound on SNES is building with legos, Genesis sound creation is play-doh. You can have amazing mutations and variations and morphing, sweeping sustains that could theoretically be matched by a sampler if the sample file was big enough and long enough to include all that, but which file sizes were not feasible on the SNES. So even here, we can see "more advanced" vs "more powerful", and see that though vastly different, even here they offer similarly quality experiences.

In the end, the SNES is "the gentleman" and Genesis is "the beast". But which one is BETTER? Overall, as I said from the start, neither one is. They're the ultimate stalemate. In micro, yes, I do believe we could say that the SNES is probably better suited for things like RPGs and special-effects fests, and Genesis is better suited for things like arcade action, shooters, brawlers, and intense platformers. But overall, the question of which is "better" can really only be answered in the realm of individual subjective personal preference. They offer such starkly different experiences. Which one is more to your tastes? Which one is stronger in the areas that matter most to you? Then on a subjective, personal tastes front, that's the better system for you, and in your world, is the winner for you. It's that amazingly complex - and also that amazingly simple. Hence why it's such a fascinating discussion!

So, which one wins in my own personal, little subjective world? Well, first let me say that I love both, feel they're both simply indispensable, and also wish deeply I could bring myself to be as subjectively neutral and impartial and unbiased as I am objectively. But yes, I do have a preference, a winner....and it doesn't just win, but wins by a significant margin.....my pick?.......Genesis does what Nintendon't! #TeamGenesis!

Cheers!

@BLP_Software You just said in two sentences what it took me a page and a half to say!

I agree with you 100%!

Neither are better but both are probably better then every console ever since

I've always favoured Sega over Nintendo in the console wars. But to be honest, I'm just glad to have been able to play through it. Some of my friends had SNES while I and some of my other friends had MegaDrive and each of us took secret pleasure in playing on the rival consoles from time to time.

Eww, the Guardian's game journalism side is absolute trash.

The only winners are the gamers who got the most out of system they loved.

Definitely SNES. There is no point in being generous with SEGA. Super Mario World, Final Fantasy, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Chrono Trigger, F-Zero, Zelda, Super Metroid, Actraiser, Lufia, Breath of Fire. And I didn't liked Super Mario Kart. Even if the Mega Drive had some decent and few good games the SNES was just another league.
A fairer match would be SNES against Amiga.

How cool would it be if Sega took advantage of the NES and SNES Mini disasters by releasing a Sega Genesis Classic Mini with like 50 games on it, wireless controllers, and lower price point. They could cap it all off by leading advertising with a slogan like 'Guaranteed stock for everyone'. Lol. It would be a super kick in the nuts to Nintendo if they did.

I loved my SNES and I still think it remains Nintendo's best home console.

But I am a Sega fanboy at heart, and the Genesis was the system that made me fall in love with Sega. So many great games on the system, including the Sonic games, the Street of Rage games, Castlevania: Bloodlines, Quackshots, Castle of Illusion, Phantasy Star II, III, and IV, Shining Force, the Mortal Kombat games(which I felt played better on Genesis), Bonanza Brothers, the Golden Axe games, Kid Chameleon, Splatterhouse 2,X-Men, X-Men 2: Clone Wars, Spiderman vs the Kingpin, the list goes on.

That, and at the risk of starting a fanboy war, I'll just say it. The Six-button Genesis Controller is better than the SNES controller, especially with fighting games

@NerdNoiseRadio I enjoyed reading your post. I've done a lot of reading and research, myself, so I know about the things you posted, but it was nice to see them presented from a different perspective and stated in a different way. There are a lot of little nuances in the specs that might not matter to casual players. As you said, the SNES audio chip has more potential than the provided RAM and ROM of the day allowed, and those were severe limitations much in the same way The Genesis/Mega Drive's color-palette setup was quite a severe limitation. The SNES had a bizarre sprite setup as well. However, it had much better RF and composite video than Sega's machine. As I stated in my previous post, the Genesis/Mega Drive is the easy winner for me, personally, as well.

@sdelfin Excellent! Thank you very much for the compliment, and glad you liked what you read. There's such a big risk of "tl;dr" when one makes a long post like mine, so I'm honored that you took the time to engage. I'm also glad to chat with another "TeamBlue", and I will gladly track down your comment and read it!

It's all the subtle and overt give and takes that makes the contest so fascinating and tirelessly interesting and engaging for me. How boring would it be if we could just simply say off the cuff that the one or the other is better. No, I like it much better this way. And as others have highlighted, the two systems actually complement each other really quite well, don't they? Who REALLY wins here? The one who has both - ESPECIALLY the one who grew up having both and got to really "live them out".

We got our SNES for Christmas 1992 (I would've been 12 at the time and just about to turn 13). The Genesis didn't come that much later, on a random September day in 1993. I was actually quite pro-SNES back in the day. But I also didn't know how to properly interpret the spec sheets. The spec sheets create the illusion of a very lopsided contest, when the reality couldn't have been further from that.

As I began to really understand the specs in the early 2000s, as an early 20-something, along with it began to come a change in perspective, in part, noticing things I hadn't noticed before, and in part, allowing myself to accept as true the things my eyes and ears had been telling me all along, but that I had previously just chocked up to my own craziness, since, after all, "the spec sheet can't be wrong".

By the late 2000's the "transformation" was complete, and I preferred Genesis across the board, graphics, sound, games, design, interface, "persona"....everything. And you know what? I still do. I run a video game music podcast (called, unsurprisingly, "Nerd Noise Radio"), and I do try to represent both systems with about equal fairness. But I know that, just personally, I'm loving life more when Genesis and PC Engine music is playing. That's more my "me time".

Actually, this creates something of an interesting tension for me as a gamer - as in the current gen, I'm so passionately pro-Nintendo, such a rabid proponent of especially the Switch, and to a lesser degree, the 3DS (I'm also a big PC gamer as well) and outside the 4th and 5th gen, and maaaaaaaaaaybe the WiiU, Nintendo has either won or tied for the win in every generation for me. Big picture, I'm Nintendo first, but then comes the tension in that in the 16-bit era - the era that I STILL consider to be my favorite, most important era, not only does Nintendo not win that era for me.....but it even comes in dead last! A weird tension! I'm such a Sega kid - and yet, such a Nintendo guy as well.

Cheers!

@yuwarite true dat

@sdelfin oh shoot! I meant to say this in my last reply, but didn't:

I came THIS close to going into the SNES sprites thing. I did go into it in my full series of articles, but felt like it might be a little too "into the weeds" when trying to summarize, especially since such thing falls under the general umbrella category of "Genesis is better with sprites", which WAS included in the comment.

But I'm very glad you lit on that issue as it's one that's so often overlooked, when it's a very significant factor.

@Krillin_ I was the opposite. I grew up with both systems, but was Pro-SNES. But a lot of that had to do with old loyalties carried over from the NES for one, and not knowing how to properly interpret the spec sheets for two, coming to the belief that the hardware was very lopsided in favor of SNES.

In the early 2000's when I was in my early 20's, though, and I began to understand the specs better, I began to see things in a different light. Part of this was through seeing and hearing things I had missed before, and part of it was through allowing myself to believe as true things that my eyes and ears were telling me all along, but I had just chocked up to my own craziness, since after all, "the spec sheet can't be wrong", right? Well, right, it can't be outright wrong. But that doesn't mean it can't be extremely misleading.

Today, I maintain most unwaveringly that the two are a stalemate hardware-wise. That they're just too "give and take" for the idea of an overall winner to be declarable. Not that they're anything alike, but that they come out a draw in the end. I won't re-make the argument for that, but if you wish to hear a summary of it, see my initial comment further down the comments thread.

But that's me speaking objectively. In terms of subjectivity, just my own personal tastes and preference, the way I worded my intro undoubtedly blew the punchline, but I gradually became Pro-Genesis. And I remain so to this day. And not just in the overall either, but down to the graphics, the sound...everything! While I still love SNES, call it one of my favorite systems of all time, consider it utterly indispensable, and genuinely wish I could be as neutral and impartial subjectively as I am objectively, I just can't. I'm #TeamGenesis all the way now.....and it's no longer even a close one.

Cheers!

Winner: SNES
Runner up: PC Engine/TG-16

Loser: Genesis/Mega Drive/Blast processing.

@NerdNoiseRadio I appreciate your love for the Genesis, but from a technical stand point it didn't hold a candle to the SNES. SNES games looked better, sounded better and were more substantial.

Example - Mortal Kombat. The Genesis version had red blood and intact fatalities, which was cool - but the character were small in scale and to me it killed game play. The characters on the SNES were larger like the arcade and had more details. The lack of colors on the genesis made everything look pixly all the time.

I can't count all the times I played cross platform titles and the Genesis version was always using smaller assets. Things were tiny and scaled back. The music always felt overly mechanical and small.

I'm always shocked when people act like they couldn't tell the difference between the two from a technical standpoint. Heck, I don't think the Genesis held up to the PC Engine once the later system cards came out. The arcade card allowed for some amazing titles I just couldn't see on the genesis.

Just my two cents.

They both are amazing consoles.
I am on SNES as it has my fave franchise and best game ever... Super Metroid.
I did so love the Sega and the games were fab, but no, there is no winner or loser, they both fantastic, who cares it's all about what you enjoy

@Darasin I'll refer you back to my main comment on this article for but a brief summary of the tech analysis of the two systems. And if you'd like the full treatment, gimme an email and I'll email you the entire 60 pages. The idea that the SNES is objectively superior holistically is simply untenable.

To your example of Mortal Kombat and other multi-platform games, take another look. The sprites do appear - at a glance - to be much bigger on the SNES, and they do because they fill up so much more of the background. Take another look at the background, though. The SNES background is letterboxed, occupying only a portion of the screen. The Genesis background? Fills the whole screen. It's a matter of forced perspective.

As it concerns supposedly smaller assets on other Genesis multiplatform games: what happens to the individual icons on your computer's desktop when you raise the resolution? They appear to get smaller, yes? But are they actually getting smaller? No, they're still 64x64 pixels (or whatever the case may be). They're the same size. There's just more room for more icons and 64x64 pixels takes up a smaller percentage of the whole. That's what you're noticing on Genesis and misinterpreting it as smaller characters. That's how I interpreted it in the 90's as well - until I knew better. A great example of just what I'm talking about is Wolfchild - or hell, Mortal Kombat. Go give that those another look.

Even more interesting are games like Bram Stoker's Dracula, where the character looks similarly sized on both, but when you do direct sprite comparisons on them, the sprites are actually bigger and more detailed on Genesis. That's quite common. Hyperstone Heist / Turtles in Time is another such example. Then you have examples where the sprites are WAY bigger on Genesis, like Fatal Fury, or.....I almost feel bad about bringing this one up, but Samurai Showdown.

But even then, discussing multiplatform games is kinda silly when discussing comparative hardware to begin with, because they usually play to the lowest common denominators. Consider this: PS3 is documented as being more powerful than XB360. But 99% of the time, the multiplatform games looked better on XB360. Why? Because the XB360 hardware architecture was a more standard design where PS3 was crazy weird architecture. So rather than wasting all this time and money getting the most out of the PS3, they just did a hack port to meet minimum standards and off you went.

So, in the case of the 16-bit generation, whichever system the game was originally designed on is almost without fail going to be the better looking/sounding game. Most of those games were designed around SNES. Plus, in order for the two to be playing in the same ballpark, a number of key Genesis advantages had to be surrendered to bring it down, yes, DOWN to SNES level. Basing your understanding on SNES vs Genesis hardware on the multiplatforms, then, is like tying the hands behind the Genesis's back and then having them fight, and then trying to say that it's because the SNES is the better fighter. It really is THAT ridiculous. Go compare console exclusives instead and then you'll see the benefits of both systems on display. Huge, detailed characters, and/or huge, detailed backgrounds and/or sprites everywhere - and all of it running at a faster, smoother, more fluid pace than SNES. Then it becomes impossible to say "well this one is clearly better" because they both outdo each other in so many contrasting ways.

Now, as far as sound, they both sound very artificial (so we can drop that as an argument against Genesis when they're both guilty). But they're artificial in different ways. The SNES samples pre-recorded sound clips of various things, but the samples are so small, that they are not only really lo-fi, but also so short that they don't allow for much nuance. It's much more wooden. And it's muffly due to forced Gaussian interpolation audio anti-aliasing. The Genesis is an actual live synthesizer, so it's going to have some limits a sampler won't, but it will also have a freedom that a sampler using very small samplers won't. Listen to the guitar solos in stages 1 and 3 of Wolfchild, and pay attention to just how much those sounds morph in the sustain. It's very fluid, very dynamic. Or, even though they're generally ugly sounds, listen to how mutable and flexible and fluid the sound effects are in Chakan the Forever Man. Due to the RAM/ROM constraints of the SNES and the really small samples it used as a result, that kind of this was just not feasible on the system.

This is why I called SNES sound like legos and Genesis sound like Play-Doh. You can truly sculpt your sounds on Genesis in a way that you cannot on SNES. And it shows! And for what it's worth, the Genesis is just much louder when all variables are equal producing, in the final analysis, something that just comes off as something with just so much power behind it. The SNES seems kinda limp by comparison.

Whether you personally prefer the sound of soft, muffly sampling on SNES or the raw synthesis of the Genesis is a matter of subjective preference, not objective fact. If you vastly prefer the SNES sound to the point that Genesis sound sounds silly to you, then you probably don't like a lot of 80's pop, or the sounds of the arcade or 70's avant garde electronics either, but that's okay. It has no bearing on the actual hardware merits of the system one way or the other what sounds you like or dislike. It's just you preferring what you prefer. I vastly prefer the sound of the Genesis. Now, I'm not so blinded by fanboyism, though, that I certainly can't think of several examples where I break from that norm and prefer the sound of the SNES. But as a rule, I hugely prefer the Sega Sound.

My point is simply that when weighing objective pros and cons, neither your preferences nor mine mean a damned thing. They're just a distraction.

I've given a small sliver of the case for a sonic stalemate here in this reply to you, a bigger sliver in my original comment, and have upon your request my 60-page series of articles that goes as granular as I am personally capable of going. I would refer you to those. Also, in the most obvious cases of the SNES version of a soundtrack being clearly better, what's the common thread? The game was designed for SNES and then hack ported to Genesis later. You've just tied the Genny's hands behind its back again.

Look, my argument is not that "Genesis is clearly objectively superior to SNES". There are too many SNES advantages for that to be tenable. My arguement instead is that "SNES is -NOT- clearly objectively superior to Genesis". There are too many Genesis advantages for that to be tenable. They are a wash, a tie, a stalemate, a draw, they brick wall each other. They're apples and oranges. Will you attempt to declare one of those objectively superior? I say you have equal luck with apples and oranges as you do with Sega and SNES. The level of tech analysis in your arguments indicate that you are approaching the matter and able to analyze the data in the year 2017 at age whatever you are at more or less the exact same level that I did in the year 1993 at the age of 13. My best advice: go back and take a closer look, and you may find yourself blown away - as I did. It was like having scales fall out of my eyes. Only beware: what is seen cannot be unseen!

Cheers!

@Darasin It's actually not clear cut. SNES games didn't always look or sound better. And they certainly didn't always run better.

Mortal Kombat isn't the best example, though the SNES was far better equipped to display digitized sprites. That was one big advantage. The SNES version had a better developer, Sculptured Software. They did MK3 on both consoles and did a much better job in my opinion on the Genesis version than Probe did on the previous games. Even if MK3 is better on the SNES as I hear it is, I was impressed with and was happy with MK3 on the Genesis thanks to Scuptured putting more care into it.

In true cross-platform games — not games with the same name but were different — such as the Lion King, the sprites are smaller because the Genesis version runs at a higher resolution. That means there's more of the playfield visible on screen which has a positive effect on game play. The assets themselves were the same. Whether the end result is better or worse is a matter of opinion. It's like Mega Man on NES and Gameboy. The Mega Man sprite looks the same in both, but takes up a lot more of the screen on the Gameboy, but that's because its resolution is much lower, not because it's more powerful.

While there are many games with bad sound on the Genesis, typically western games, there are many games with great sound, unless you just don't like the tone of the sound chip. But SNES had some games with terrible sound as well such as Captain Commando. Bad Genesis sound is metallic and grating for music and effects, and scratchy for speech. It was, perhaps, worse than the SNES games with bad sound. Bad SNES sound was horribly muffled and plagued with terrible processing and low-quality samples.

I love PC Engine, but never had much interest in the limited number of arcade card titles so I've only ever played a couple. The arcade card was not magic and acted like a refillable HuCard. The PC Engine's strengths and weaknesses remained. I won't say you're right or wrong in your assessment, but I will point out that all those old systems benefit when ROM space isn't a big problem.

Both great. The winner was is the people

@sdelfin haha! Looks like we crossed each other in the mail! I'll read your reply, you read mine, and then let's compare notes!

Why tho

@NerdNoiseRadio I will agree its rough to discuss prowess of systems that existed so long ago, but I did recently play the two MK1's for Genesis and SNES. The Genesis version seems cheesy graphically and undersized - its why I used that example. When you raise or lower the resolution of something, you can play with pixel size to offset how large a character is at any given resolution. Are you saying the developers were to lazy to size the pixels on the genesis?

On sounds, overall, I find SNES sound far superior to Genesis. To be fair, let's do this. If its within your power, can you link some examples to sound you believe clearly shows the Genesis prowess? I'll listen closely and compare to items I feel were high points for the SNES and give you my feedback. Fair? I don't want time or failing memories to ruin a reasonable discussion. There is a element to the sound on the genesis that drives me nuts and I swear the term for its lost on me, but I'll do my best to look for it. Artificial and yes it does remind me of 80's arcades. Example - the voices / sound from the start of Altered Beasts - if that helps?

On the cross platform sound angle. Lets say we were comparing Sonic to SMW - to me Mario sounds better then Sonic. The best way I can compare is that the effects sound cut off. The end of sounds stop abruptly making the effect jarring to me.

You said you've written on some of this? I'd be more then willing to read what you've written if you can share?

Graphics - when you mention the habit of of different companies performing ports its likely not fair to point to cross platform. Ok - fine.

I guess that when I think of Super Metroid, Yoshi Island, DKC, FF6 or Chrono Trigger I can't think of any Genesis games that match those efforts graphically. I always felt like the lack of colors really hurt the overall look of Genesis titles. To this day I can play SMW and be ok with the look, but the Sonic titles "look" tired to me.

I still feel like the SNES was noticeable better overall in sound and graphics. I'm willing to review examples with you, out of fun, and be proven wrong if I am. I don't think I will concede, but I am open to being surprised.

Dar

@NerdNoiseRadio I saw your reply post right before mine. The difference was 23 seconds. I considered using the PC desktop resolution example you used. It's a good example. I thought Gameboy Mega Man would work better because Mega Man is fun. It's funny how a strength of the Genesis, the high-resolution mode which also brought a bump to on-screen sprites, could work against it in multi-platform games by giving the impression of having smaller sprites — and they are smaller to our eyes despite being the same number of pixels. I would have been bothered by that in the 90s, but I prefer having a larger viewable area now. For example, I think Mega Turrican is way better than Super Turrican(still good), in large part due to the higher resolution, among other things. Like you, I'm trying to stay as objective as possible despite having a subjective preference. My inner fanboy would prefer if Natsume developed for the Genesis bringing Ninja Warriors Again and Pocky and Rocky over. Perhaps they would have been "better" in some ways. But then, who cares? They're already great on the SNES. And Pocky and Rocky definitely would take a color hit. Luckily, we don't have to choose only one side these days.

You mentioned Wolf Child. I'm aware of it, but have never gotten around to trying it. Do you think it's worth a look? I'm currently working on a reply to your previous post. We have some commonality aside from our preference. We each had both systems when they were relevant, but in my case I had the Genesis first. I've come to the conclusion that one big reason for preferring the Genesis is the time period it spanned. Trends were shifting in 1994 and that affected the SNES library more.

They did very different things. I think @NerdNoiseRadio makes a good analogy - the SNES was a gentleman and the Mega Drive was a beast. The SNES was a rapier and the Mega Drive was an axe - more powerful but less civilised.

Personally I'd say the SNES was always better. The best games on the SNES advanced the medium, breaking new ground from a design standpoint - creating the cornerstones that modern games are built.

By contrast the best games on the Mega Drive drew on a different tradition of games entirely. It was the best place for home versions of arcade games. Of course this means it's library has aged much less well (especially since the design principles those games adhere to have long fallen out of fashion & anyone who wants to revisit those games can go straight to MAME or Neo Geo emulation instead).

And of course from a gameplay perspective the SNES controller offered far more options to developers. There was (& still is) a cost to adding more buttons but it was easily worth it.

@sdelfin @NerdNoiseRadio
"Bad Genesis sound is metallic and grating for music and effects, and scratchy for speech." Yes, that pretty close to what I was trying o say. My question for either, give me an example of great Genesis Audio that I missed?

I've read the resolution war arguments of the 16 bit era from Genny to SNES to TG-16 to Neo Geo. My rub is still the same, things look tinny and my understanding is they didn't have to. In my MK example they could have used larger sprites to make larger character and prevent the game from looking tinny. The difference in resolution isn't enough to justify how small the characters look. They are already smaller, even of the resolution exasperates the effect.

TG-16 - the system card, system card 3 and Arcade Card were nothing more then memory for the CDROM. I mention then because as memory increased, so did the scope of TG-16 games. Fatal Fury Special on Arcade card was damn close to MVS in quality. I also felt like TG-16 titles typically system 3 and up looked much better then Genny. Music yes if CD sound, which isn't fair I know. Sound chip sound was inferior for sure.

Dar

@sdelfin I think the problem with resoltion is the net effect in the 16bit days it made Genny games look small. Most titles looking small wasn't offset enough by the small bump in resolution. Depending on your TV, you might not have even enjoyed the clarity back then vs just seeing fiendishly small sprites. A few companies like Sega obviously played with pixel size in games like Sonic. I just feel like this didn't happen enough.

I have to run for a bit, but will try to make it back later. If anyone wants to link an example of graphics or audio on Genny that shows superiority - I will glad watch and reply.

What a great thread.

PS: @StuTwo - give me some examples of arcade ports being better on Genny? When I think SF or Neo Geo I always felt like the SNES versions were better. Just curious what you think?

@StuTwo That's a fair assessment and goes back to those who say it depends on genre preferences. I've come to understand that I didn't enjoy where games started to go in 1995. I'm not fond of heavily story-driven games. People who love the early arcade scene of score-chasing games still love the Atari, Intellivision, Colecovision, etc. I prefer game design of the late 80s and early 90s the most. So the Genesis library works better for me. I describe the Genesis as picking up where the NES left off, especially with action platformers.

Snes, not even a contest for me. Only console that holds candle to that is the PS1.

I'm a SNES boy but damn I do love me some Streets of Rage!

@Darasin in another reply I'm writing to NerdNoiseRadio, I raise the point you did, and it's a good point, about how the high-res mode of the Genesis could work against it by making the sprites appear smaller, even though they're the same sprite and the same size internally as pixels. However, only in the context of this discussion of what is "better", the fact that the Genesis has a useful high-res mode is something it has over the SNES. But back to practical applications, again using a game like the Lion King as it's a common example, while you end up with larger sprites on the SNES version, you also have lower visibility leading to blind jumps and less time to react to enemies. If the smaller sprites are a con for the Genesis, a cropped playfield is a con for the SNES. In a cross-platform game like The Lion King, which was mostly the same on each system, developers generally would not use different assets for each version. In that case, they also decided to use the Genesis high-res mode(which leads me to believe the Genesis was the lead platform for that game), which also allowed them more sprites on screen than low-res mode. In other cases, a developer might stick with the Genesis low-res mode to match the SNES version. Sometimes, choices made in development don't make for easy comparison of what is "better". There are games exclusive to the Genesis running in high resolution that also have sprites adjusted to be large, so it's clearly not as issue of the system needing small sprites compared to the SNES, but just a matter of decisions made during development.

My point on PCE and the system cards is that more ROM space increased the scope of game development on all sprite-based systems. It wasn't unique to PCE. There were huge, noticeable upgrades going to 16, 24, 32 megs and beyond. Perhaps those SNK ports did things the Genesis couldn't. Certainly the PCE's color was better. But the Genesis still did things the PCE could not, even with the arcade card.

There are actually a lot of differences between SF2 Turbo on SNES, SF2:SCE on Genesis and SF2:CE on PCE.

So I said bad Genesis sound is metallic and grating. I don't downplay how bad some Genesis games could sound, but there are many games with great sound. Most of the bad-sounding Genesis games were western developed and using the same GEMS sound engine. The Japanese developers were far better with FM sound and Yuzo Koshiro, who did some wonderful work on many systems, had good things to say about working with the Genesis. To me, the best Genesis tunes were lively and rocking. For now, I'll list games and, if I can, I'll link later:

Shinobi 3(the whole thing, I'd start there), Gunstar Heroes, Alien Soldier, Golden Axe 2, Streets of Rage 1-2, Sonic the Hedgehog 1-3, Shadow Dancer, Revenge of Shinobi, MUSHA(speed metal), Thunderforce 4, Elemental Master, TMNT Hyperstone Heist, Mega Turrican, Rolling Thunder 2-3, Vapor Trail, Captain America and the Avengers, Dragon's Fury/Devil Crash MD, Alisia Dragoon, Castlevania Bloodlines, Phantasy Star 4, Light Crusader. Those are the best examples I can think of right now. I'll see if I can do links later.

I really love both consoles and feel like sega made them better then Nintendo back then (master system having RGB for a start) but when it comes to the games library imo snes trounces the mega drive

SNES is obviously the best 16bit since it is also the greatest system of any era for all time.

Top 5 systems:
1. Super Nintendo
2. SNES
3. Super Nintendo Entertainment System
4. Super NES
5. Super Famicom

@SLIGEACH_EIRE

The panel is being hosted by the Guardian, but it's apparently going to be made up of various people who actually work in the industry. So the answer is... They probably know a bit.

Obviously there's never going to be a "definitive" answer to this question, since - beyond some technical aspects - it's all subjective.

With that said, depending on who's invited, it could be an entertaining and informative discussion.

I personally think the Super NES has the vastly superior library - but that's because I love JRPGs, and I've never had much interest in fighters or arcade-style games.

They each have their strengths. Sega's console has a better processor, shooters galore, Sonic, and a better D-pad. Nintendo's console has better graphics and sound, RPGs galore, Mario, and more buttons.

NBA jam is better on sega mega drive than SNES in my opinion.

@speedracer216 Obviously, eh? And which official list of indisputably best systems are you pulling that list from? You're either being tongue-in-cheek, in which case, rock on. Or you meant subjectively rather than objectively, in which case, you're certainly free to feel however you wish with no objections from me, only choosing to use the word "obviously" was unfortunate because it implies an objective assertion. Or you actually were trying to make an actual objective assertion, with no argument to back it up, and the "obviously" doing nothing but appealing to itself - if it's the latter option, then there's no "obviously" about it, until you can make a coherent case for it. Suppose you say "obviously SNES is better", and I say "obviously Genesis is better." Now what? Now we're at an impasse. In any case, before you can "obviously anything", you've gotta be able to make a coherent argument. I've made some coherent (if at the expense of being terribly wordy) arguments already on this thread that predict such an argument will not be forthcoming, or that if it is, it will not be persuasive.

@Sondheimist @StuTwo Those are fair posts. Objectively, the two stalemate. Subjectively, it's in the eye of the beholder, and largely depends on which parts of the hardware or software benefit of each system appeals more to your personal tastes and interests.

When it comes to software libraries, this is way too general of me to apply to everything, but just speaking in sweeping terms, I feel the best way to summarize the difference between the major software titles of both platforms is SNES games are more "telescope" and Genesis games are more "microscope". Now, what do I mean by that? SNES games seem to be more story-driven, long-road, big world epics that span vast spaces, but seem to be so much simpler and basic and plainer in terms of what's actually happening on the screen at any given moment. Genesis games seem to have much bigger, more action packed, more detailed "right in front of you" vistas, in smaller, more segmented, more linear "worlds". So, one approach puts more emphasis on the big picture, while the other approach puts more emphasis on the small picture.

Again, examples of possible exceptions will abound on both sides, and again, I don't think that one approach is inherently better or worse than the other. But this difference reflects in Sonic vs Mario, Metroid vs Shinobi, Zelda vs Golden Axe or Altered Beast, or Streets of Rage, or whatever other games we want to pit against each other. The SNES games tend to be bigger worlds made up of smaller scenes, where Genesis games tended to be smaller worlds made up of bigger scenes.

Though looking at the history of the franchises, I prefer the Mario universe to the Sonic universe big picture (by a LONG SHOT) - and Zelda and Metroid are my two favorite franchises in history - period - both with excellent showings in the 16-bit......I still find myself preferring the offerings provided by the Genesis.

Perhaps it's worth noting here that I don't feel like SNES particularly faltered at all. It's an amazing system with an amazing software library perfectly in keeping with the rest of Nintendo history. Instead, I feel like the bright and shining sun of Nintendo very briefly had the Sega moon pass in front of it during the 16-bit generation (to use a timely analogy for Americans).

Now, whether you agree or disagree with that, does that at least make sense?

@BulbasaurusRex you'll have to see some of the earlier conversations, but even the graphics and sound are not so cut and dry. You talk about Genesis and SNES being give and take, and I say "amen and amen". But I would maintain that even the graphics themselves, and even the sound itself are give and take as well. I won't re-make the whole argument here, but see my earliest post for a pretty nice summary of the matter. Also, you'll be able to glean a little of that difference from what I intend to say to some of our other conversation partners below. But in short, I think saying either system categorically has better graphics or better sound is untenable. I would never go so far as to advance either of those assertions in favor of Genesis....but I would GLADLY go so far as to deny them in favor of SNES. Read my earlier posts to learn more.

@sdelfin @Darasin Okay, finally back to you guys! So sorry it took me so long to reply. I had to put it down for work, and for the family commute this evening, and am just now at liberty to pick this back up.

I think I can offer a different perspective on the resolution and sprite size thing. I actually prefer the sprites in higher resolution. When they're in low res, they look stretched, and maybe "smeary" isn't the right word, but "diffuse" maybe? It's the same or less detail spread over a larger space, so you're going to have that effect. You're just gonna. Also, aliasing tends to be much more apparent in the SNES iterations, in part because higher resolution always improves aliasing when all else is equal, and in part because the softer Genesis AV output hides some of that, and where color fringing isn't an issue, that softness creates a false, but sometimes quite convincing illusion of an even greater resolution advantage than there actually is. The sprites on the Genesis, even when they're dot for dot equal, and even when they [falsely] appear to be smaller on the screen are still tighter, and denser in their detail, making them look less diffuse and - in my opinion, BETTER. I like the sprites better on the Genesis Wolfchild, Lion King, TMNT, Bram Stoker's Dracula.....and (gasp) possibly even Mortal Kombat 1.

The Genesis MK sprites are much lower color, which does work against them admittedly. But they are otherwise identical sprites, dot for dot. They are the same size on a pixel graph, and everything. The SNES versions look so aliased and diffuse, where the Genesis ones look tighter and less aliased.

The point is, it's easy to understand why one would prefer the look of the more colorful SNES MK sprites, and why one would find their "illusion of 'biggerness'" as also being advantageous. But there's a counterperspective out there that I myself hold which says that the illusion of bigger without the necessary pixels to fill in the blanks is almost NEVER better, and not better in any of the cases we've discussed here. So, on the subjective front, we find ourselves at an impasse.

But what's the point that I've been laboring this whole time? Our subjectivity doesn't really matter outside of our own living rooms. You preferring the look of the SNES Lion King sprites doesn't make them better, nor does my preference of the Genesis sprites. Filling a higher or lower percentage of the screen being "more desirable" or "less desirable" is subjective in the context we've been discussing it, and therefore, ultimately meaningless to the question of the objective question of superior or inferior hardware.

Were we to look at it objectively, we ask these kinds of questions instead: 1) How many pixels are in the sprite? Same. It's a tie. 2) How many colors are used in the sprite? Presumably higher on the SNES (though not necessarily so in all cases). Advantage SNES (where applicable). 3) How many pixels are on the screen in total? 320x224p vs 256x224p (too lazy to do that math). Advantage Genesis. 4) Which one is carrying the "heavier processing load"? Answer: Genesis. 5) Is Genesis handling the load at lower performance, higher performance, or equal performance. Answer: Higher. Faster, more fluid, less slowdown. Summary: Higher processing load at faster, more fluid, less slowdown performance vs higher color and cleaner AV output. Which one takes that? I'll leave that question open. But those kind of questions.....if I can be brutally frank....are the ONLY questions that REALLY matter here, at the end of the day. Everything else is us just waxing preferential, all of us [QUITE FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING] engaging in "group masturbation".

It would be easy for me to share tracks and graphics that push me towards my "subjective" preference of the Genesis. But trying to keep us on track in our quest for objectivity, I would only share stuff that highlights actual objective advantages of the Genesis. To that end, rather than focusing on music that I particularly love, and hoping you'd be inspired to feel the same way, I would instead, only want to share things that are crisper, cleaner, louder, punchier, beefier, more [quote unquote] "hi-fi" than their SNES counterparts....or else....more fluid, more dynamic, more flexible, demonstrating greater live morph, and less "woodenness" than your typical SNES fare. Things that are objectively better in those regards, not things that just subjectively tickle me - though a great many of the tracks that I'll highlight have the added benefit of doing both!

To that end, I'd want to echo delf's recommendation for Shinobi 3 and SOR 2. I'd also point you to Sonic 3's Hydrocity Zone act one. Though you may well prefer the arrangement on the SNES version of the Bram Stoker's Dracula soundtrack (and my blessings if you do), I don't want you to listen for preferred arrangement (which is subjective and irrelevant), or even the broadness of potential instrumentation (which is an objective SNES advantage that delf and I have already freely admitted). Instead, I would want you to listen for all the things I mentioned above as objective benefits to the Genesis version. You'll hear them. You'll also hear them in the two versions of the Mortal Kombat soundtrack. You might prefer the soundscapes the hazier SNES version offers (and maybe the SNES version even fits the mood of the game more appropriately). But in terms of raw "oomph" factor, you'll see that Genesis carries the day.

At the risk of sounding waaaaaaaaay colder than I intend to, I don't really care which one you "prefer", all I want to face you with is the fact that for each advantage the SNES sound system offers, there's a counter-advantage to the Genesis sound system. That's it.

In terms of the greater fluidity of the Genesis sound system, I'm actually going to refer you to a couple tracks that most would find to be unpleasant "noise" tracks. The purpose isn't to get you to enjoy the tracks, but to just see how much more fluid sound production is on the Genesis. I'd refer you to "The Fire Dragon" (Fire Dimension 2) from Chakan the Forever Man, and "Mojo's Future Crush" from X-Men. Now go listen to, oh, say, "Aquasphere Surface" from Xardion on SNES. Now, you may vastly prefer the sound of the latter - and that's fine. But even still, you should still be able to see how much more wooden the sound is on it, how it's very obviously made of small clips of sound reused over and over, rather than the sweeping ooze that is the Genesis sound generation.

Also, notice how when there is richness to SNES sound, like there is in that Xardion track how it comes in the form of mud in the bass. Compare that Xardion track to "Cycle 1" from Streets of Rage 3, or "Spin on the Bridge" from Streets of Rage 2, "Alien's Den", or "The Hard Corps" from Contra Hard Corps, or either Sisyphus or Casey Jones stage from TMNT TF, and observe just how much tighter and crisper, cleaner, and punchier the bass is on the Genesis. To cross reference, go back to Simon Belmont's Theme from Super Castlevania IV for muddy bass on the SNES (as well as how wooden the instruments are, and how much flatter and less crispy/dazzling the high and mid instruments are). For cross reference on how much crisper and dazzling the Genesis highs and mids are, stay with Castlevania, but jump over to Bloodlines. Listen to the Password screen. So much brighter, and more dazzling, and crisper. Also, the voices are much more fluid and less wooden. Even on tracks that are thin and reedy on the Genesis, such as "Grass Land" from Burning Force or "BGM 2" from Arnold Palmer Golf, the tracks are still crisper, brighter, and more dazzling.

Look, the point isn't to get you to prefer the Genesis sound, nor is it to attempt to argue that Genesis sound is holistically objectively superior to SNES sound. I still maintain that they're that stalemate, that draw. But while virtually everybody and their grandmothers are aware of the ways in which the SNES sound system is better (and it's TRULY better in those ways), not everyone recognizes or appreciates the ways in which the Genesis sound system is better than the SNES (and it too is TRULY better in those ways). I do hope that I've at least accomplished that much.

As far as graphics, games that use high resolution as well as sprites that are more detailed, and "bigger enough" to still look bigger even though the resolution is higher are also replete. Shinobi 3, Alterred Beast, Golden Axe, Streets of Rage 2 and 3, Sonic (obviously) even things like Puggsy, Sword of Sodan, X-Men and especially X-Men 2, and on and on and on and on and on. We were talking about Mortal Kombat. Well, compare full screen stills of Mortal Kombat II. The sprites are actually BIGGER and more detailed on the Genesis version, even AFTER the resolution thing. Once again forced perspective comes into play, because the characters "stand" lower on the screen in the Genesis version, and the health bars are smaller and pushed higher up to the top. But still, with bigger sprites and bigger energy bars, the forced perspective effect is much less strong for the sequel.

Why didn't they make the sprites bigger on MK1? Dunno. But it wasn't a hardware limitation. As delf said, the MK1 port was rough around the edges. Had they placed them on the screen where the SNES characters were, it wouldn't have really mattered because the forced perspective thing would go away. Want examples of sprites flying everywhere, just pick a shooter or a run and gun with your eyes closed and you'll find one. Gunstar Heroes, anybody? Also, consider how blazing fast and action packed that game is.

Of course, just because the Genesis COULD and USUALLY did blow way past SNES in terms of sprites and character sprite size doesn't mean it ALWAYS did. Both the Genesis Contra and Castlevania games used smaller, and less detailed character sprites than their SNES counterparts for no apparent reason. Just because you CAN outperform the other system doesn't mean you're ALWAYS gonna. Not every SNES game blows past its Genesis counterpart in terms of on-screen colors, for instance. Not every SNES game uses mode 7. And so on.

The point is that the rule is well established. SNES owns colors, special effects and clean AV. Genesis owns large, detailed, fast moving, plenteous sprites and amazing animations. And both of these can be said objectively and irrefutably. As I said in my initial comment, we treat "more advanced" and "more powerful" as inseparable propositions, but I think SNES vs Genesis conclusively disproves the inseparability of the two, as I think those summarize the differences between the two systems PERFECTLY! SNES is "more advanced", whereas Genesis is "more powerful".

Which one ultimately yields better results out of that distinction is pretty much entirely relegated to the realm of the subjective (where I'm really trying very hard NOT to go), but I hope I've at least demonstrated for you that not only in graphics and processing power, but also in sound, Genesis is "more powerful". I don't need to demonstrate that SNES is "more advanced" in these ways......because everyone already knows that. I need instead to only prove what is less widely realized, and I hope that that's what I've accomplished here tonight.

But all this is really all to all our advantages today as we can reap the benefits and enjoyment of both. Consider: BOTH Donkey Kong Country - AND - Vectorman would probably have been worse had they been on the other platform.

Cheers!

P.s. I've been avoiding PC Engine / Turbografx16 talk deliberately because I wanted to fully flesh out the Genesis / SNES thing, and then, if we weren't all burned out on the conversation by then, bring the TG16 in afterwards. BTW: This is exact same way that I dealt with it in my articles. The first several installments dealt directly with SNES vs Genesis, and then once that ran its course, I brought in the TG16 and compared it to both of them.

p.p.s. I would not mind at all sharing the articles with you. The site they were on has been taken down, and I don't believe it's back up. So, do this: find my Nerd Noise Radio FB page, message me on there, tell me you're Dar (or Delf.....or anyone else who's interested) from the NintendoLife comments section, and I'll send you the word.doc containing all the installments, plus a few other bonuses.

@bolt05 ESPECIALLY THE MUSIC!!!

@Derasin Something just occurred to me: if you want a huge sample of FM music that I think is just awesome, that I might possibly use to attempt to warm your heart to FM sound, I would actually point you to Episode 2 of my own podcast.

I was an idiot and accidentally recorded the music blocks of episodes 1 and 2 in mono (Episode 3 and forward is in stereo). Nevertheless, Episode 2 still has one of my favorite music blocks of the 20 I've produced so far. And it's ALL FM-based music. Now, that doesn't mean it's all Sega Genesis music. Indeed, only roughly half of it is Sega Genesis. The rest are from all the other FM systems out there throughout gaming history. Most of these systems are technically superior to the Genesis (a couple are actually inferior), though the family resemblance with FM is so strong that to most people it may be believable if I tried to tell you it was ALL Sega Genesis.

Since I think hyperlinks are blocked here, I won't include one. But I'd just steer you to YouTube, and have you search for "Nerd Noise Radio - Channel 1 - C1E2: "Twisted Sine", and you should be able to find it.

@sdelfin, you might particularly enjoy this episode too!

I apologize for not having popups with track info. Those didn't debut until episode 5 (along with a better looking logo backdrop). But the track listing IS included in the video description (aka the "episode show notes"), and you can follow along that way.

Cheers!

It's basically the "Xbox or Playstation" phenomenon.

They're both essentially the same consoles. They both have around the same power, and they both have mostly the same games. Every time a new AAA title comes out, if it's on one, it's on the other.

To sum it up rather quickly - it all depends on games. Sega had its fair share of great 3rd party titles and even had a rather fun handful of 1st party games as well. Games like Alex Kidd and Sonic were huge hits. The same goes for Super Nintendo. It had Mario World, Zelda Link to the past, and more.

In my opinion, SNES is better, just because of the games. If you prefer Sonic over Mario, then Genesis will probably be your favorite. The hardware is almost exactly the same.

It is all based on opinion and sometimes the controller design.
(BTW I really didn't like the genesis but Mega Man: The Wily Wars was a fantastic game )

@NerdNoiseRadio exactly! And the sound effects for that matter. The SNES version feels like half the game is missing!

I love both, they both have pros and cons. I am so glad I grew up during the 16 bit era, and was fortunate to experience both of them.

SNES > Mega drive

@NerdNoiseRadio
I can tell this is a passion point for you. In fact, do you have a website (i saw your youtube) but I swear I read an article from you a couple years ago (or a series of articles?) on the 16-bit war and tech details of the systems. If that was you, I remember it being easily the best piece I've read/seen on this stuff precisely because it was a straight comparison without the "snes is better!" fluff.

For my part, yes I was joking. SNES is far and away my (subjective) favorite system. That's why I laugh at these "debates" which are actually just opinions. even for NintendoLife to say "finally answered.... by a bunch of people's opinions". lol. Thus my list of top 5 systems was just various ways to say SNES. sorry for grinding your gears, was just being funny (or not). btw, i have a SNES and Genesis hooked to my main tv still.

@speedracer216 I had a pretty good laugh at your list. Number five was my favorite.

@PurinPuff There are objective ways to quantify which product is better, when they're this similar. One's ability to pick a favorite while ignoring facts is not in dispute here.

Obviously, that's true as far as the hardware and tech goes, the games themselves are art and can't be included in such a debate, in my opinion.

@sdelfin You wrote
in another reply I'm writing to NerdNoiseRadio, I raise the point you did, and it's a good point, about how the high-res mode of the Genesis could work against it by making the sprites appear smaller, even though they're the same sprite and the same size internally as pixels. However, only in the context of this discussion of what is "better", the fact that the Genesis has a useful high-res mode is something it has over the SNES."

See, I think this is a fallacy. I know you're using the term high res loosely, but given the state of TVs at the time I don't find the extra lines of resolution as game changing. Even the Neo Geo (clearly more powerful) didn't use that res. TV's didn't universally benefit from it at that time. The extra 70 lines on the genesis don't hold up to the fact the SNES had more colors, more sprite ability, rotation and scaling.

I would agree that bad ports could give either system an unfair advantage, but the best SNES games are clearly better then the best Genesis games on a technical level. I can't think of any Genesis games that look as good as DKC, Yoshi Island, FF6 or Chrono Trigger for example.

On just the audio. I've listened to a few example, I am going through them all now. I took Chakan as it came up earlier, but its just as grating as I remember. I can't stand how rough it sounds. I'm going to work your list today.

Dar

@NerdNoiseRadio

Ok - I'm at work, so I am going to just hit the highlights.

Resolution - its 70 lines. I don't know that it makes sense to push this as high and low res other then to say there is a difference? Does 70 lines make the system more technically powerful then a system that displays a lot more colors from a much larger palate when talking 2D? How about rotation, scaling and the better sprite capabilities of the SNES? Its like we're ignoring the best graphical abilities of the time for 70 lines.

Now, I get that I mentioned the MK1 thing and here is what throws me. You say its been proven they are using the same pixel size and the difference is resolution. My problem is the difference feels much larger then that. I'm trying to use emulation to review this weekend out of curiosity. Let's just say its just resolution. Ok fine, that's why the genesis look small. How about the lack of colors and the missing digital look of the game vs the arcade? The Genesis is lacking there as well. I mention this just to point out that there is more missing then just sprite size due to resolution.

Slowdown - most of the SNES games I can think of that had slowdown (Super R Type / Gradius) the developer either said they were deliberately slowing the title down or it was observed that the Japanese version didn't slow down. Irem admitted to slowing R Type down for Americans.

You mentioned this sprite superiority of the Genesis. MK2 was an example. I'll check it out. Like I said, the best looking games on the SNES are unmatched by anything on the genesis. I don't recall the Genesis having anything that can match Super Metroid, DKC, FF6 or Chrono Trigger - let alone Yoshi's Island for graphical prowess.

Typically, the most powerful 2D system would be the one capable of making the best looking game with the most stuff happening on the screen. Winner - likely Neo geo lol. Take that over priced monster off and its the SNES. From colors to sprites to special effects (transparency) it painted a better scene. Colors alone are going to be a much bigger deal then 70 lines of resolution.

Audio - I'm just having a hard time with this one. Genesis sound and music just sounds so rough to me. Its like metal grating lol.

I'll hit you up on Facebook.

Dar

@NerdNoiseRadio I turned to YouTube to check out the difference between Genesis and SNES MK2. There are plenty of comparison videos. After watching 3 or 4 of them its pretty clear the SNES version is vastly superior to the Genesis.

As several reviewers mention, the SNES version is almost arcade perfect and the Genesis version is missing parallax (thats odd as its something the Genesis usually does well), scaling and a lot of voices. Most reviewers agree that Probe did a shoddy port.

@Darasin I'm using the term high resolution relative to the system's low-resolution mode. How important that feature is then becomes a subjective matter. For example, Mode 7 background scaling and rotation is a feature of the SNES and was dazzling at the time. But there are many terrible uses of it, at least subjectively to me(ruins Contra 3 for me). If you don't see a benefit to the Genesis high-res mode, that's fine. Many great games were made at 256x224. My favorites of those usually had tiny sprites as seen in the likes of Shatterhand, Batman the Movie(NES), Ninja Gaiden, and many more. Many great games were done at the lower resolutions of the Gameboy and Gameboy Advance. But resolution is not insignificant, which is evident when they ported many SNES games to the GBA with a cropped field of play. Some fared better than others To me, the Genesis H40 high-res mode is a great feature and I appreciate it tremendously. It was a plus in cross-platform games that used it. That's my subjective view. You're free to think it didn't amount to much. I disagree.

"but the best SNES games are clearly better then the best Genesis games on a technical level"

I have yet to see a SNES game that pushes as many sprites, as many large sprites, as many multi-jointed sprites, with as much speed, with as much fluidity, and with as much going on as Alien Soldier by Treasure, masters of technical programming on the Genesis. I haven't seen anything on the SNES rival the fluidity and carnage of Gunstar Heroes, also by Treasure. There are games that do simple sprite scaling and rotation in software on Genesis. It's more limited than if by hardware, but it has been done.

I'm not saying your examples are wrong. What I'm saying is declaring total technical superiority is incorrect because there are multiple elements to that beyond simply more colors and PCM audio. DKC doesn't do nearly as much simultaneously as most of Treasure's games. Dynamite Headdy is loaded with special effects that are just brute force of sprite handling and CPU processing. But I will not misrepresent what the Genesis can do. When it comes to colors, its small number of sprite/background palettes is a severe limitation. The system would not be able to render DKC as impressively. It's better at simpler, cartoon-style or comic-style graphics, rather than digitized or pre-rendered. And even with games using pixel art, I fully admit games like Chrono Trigger have more detail due to more color. That is technical superiority in one way. If that carries more weight for you, or anyone else, that's fine. My goal here is to point out it's not as simple as it seems on the surface. I preferred games like Shinobi 3, the Sonic Series, Gunstar Heroes, Alien Soldier, etc when I was young, and I still prefer them today because of how they run. These are games that took advantage of the Genesis and what it could do. I've seen nothing on the SNES that runs the same way.

Chakan was not mentioned by NNR as an example of good music, but as an example of specific sound capability. The list of games I mentioned is more about good use of FM. If you simply don't like the sound of FM synth, then you won't like the Genesis. Kudos to you for being open minded, though. Music is, possibly, the most subjective thing there is, so I won't knock people for disliking FM. I spent a lot of time in arcades, so I love FM. I have a strong dislike for when SNES music is heavily muffled and filtered, with short, cut-off samples. That's pretty common, but it's not always the case either.

MK2 isn't a great comparison because of different developers. Compare MK3. The SNES likely still wins(I never got to play it), but the Genesis version is good. Sculptured did a much better job with the Genesis than Probe ever did. MK as a series is better suited to the SNES as the arcade used PCM sound, and digitized graphics benefit from more colors. But that is just one style of game.

What makes determining a winner so difficult on a technical level with tile-based systems, especially mass-market systems where cost matters, is that they're not designed the same way. Most of what these systems can do are built-in, specific features of custom video processors. The faster CPU processing of the Genesis allowed it to pull off tricks in software it was never intended to do(scaling and rotation, 3D processing, etc). SNES came out with many built-in features. The end result is the games on the systems end up being very different.

@Darasin Keep in mind though, at such low resolutions, an extra 70 lines of horizontal resolution is over 25% more lines.

I'm doing this extra reply to bring up the Genesis' "Shadow and Highlight" mode. This often gets brought up in defense of the system. It's a special effect that allows it to technically show more colors. The reason I bring it up is because, while it exists and was used, it had such a limited use case that I think it's mostly insignificant. Some people really latch onto that in the system's defense. I wanted to mention it first, because I don't think it amounts to much in such a comparison. It's certainly no replacement for sprite and background palettes.

@sdelfin I'm not ignoring the extra resolution, so much as saying while its a win - it doesn't negate or offset the list of advantages the SNES offers. I think we've had a good discussion about ports and the quality or lack thereof. I think the nod would go SNES, but anyone can botch a port or multi console system - fair enough.

Since we talking technical superiority, I'm saying that those 70 lines don't make up for the missing colors, total colors, hardware rotation, scaling, zoom, lighting and transparency. When a competent developer wanted a SNES game to look amazing, it did and often with little sacrifice. Also, its been said many times, but most manufacturers didn't use that resolution as it was lost of most people's TV's. It likely helps some of these titles more today then back then. Not even SNK bothered to support it.

There were some great looking Genesis games where lack of prowess caused blemishes. The most common I noticed is color, missing frames and transparency (this one drove me nuts during the Sega days). These are the big ones that stood out to me and thats why I say the SNES was the superior graphical system.

I think even Treasure would have had a problem making some of the best SNES games work on the Genesis.

Audio wise I think you nailed it when you said I may just not like FM Synth and I think thats true. I still think the Sony sound chip was technically superior - but sound is subjective and I don't blame you for liking synth so much.

Overall best system. I think that should remain undecided. I think the SNES was better as it spoke to me, but empirically we know there are people who just like what Sega was doing. Weaker system or not (my words) these people liked Sega. I'm ok with that.

@sdelfin "Keep in mind though, at such low resolutions, an extra 70 lines of horizontal resolution is over 25% more lines."

TVs from that era really negated that.

@Darasin Yeah, some ports are so bad, they don't prove anything. Thunder Force 3 was ported from the Genesis to the SNES as Thunder Spirits, and it's not so good. Just shooting causes slowdown. It's obvious it's poorly made and why I never referred to it to support my position.

As far as I've observed and read, it was usually the Genesis that had more frames of animation in games or had more content than SNES counterparts. But I've never done a comprehensive review of that game by game and don't intend to. It's a game-specific thing. Color and transparency are specific features of the SNES.

The Genesis actually benefited from old TVs when it came to transparency and color. Dithering was a convincing way to achieve transparency and more colors, due to the relatively poor signal quality of composite or RF connections, which kind of smeared things. You don't have to take my word for that. You can search and see for yourself that it was a thing. However, Genesis RF and composite out tended to be poor so it's a bit of a wash. Obviously, cheating a transparency doesn't apply in the age of emulation or RGB out and it's still not as good as the real thing.

I'm no expert on TVs, video standards, or whatever, so I may be wrong. But I think you are incorrect about old TVs and the extra 70 pixel width. The way I understand it, the system resolutions were internal resolutions. The video encoder would send it to the TV as something it could use. For example, 256x224 would be stretched wide and was intended to be stretched. The TV was just receiving an already-processed NTSC or PAL signal. As I understand it, the TV would have no problem displaying the Genesis in either mode and there was always something lost to overscan no matter what system and what resolution. There are PC Engine games also running in higher resolution. If there was no benefit to it, I doubt anyone would have bothered. Keep in mind, Laserdiscs and DVDs had a higher resolution than NTSC broadcast, and I don't think the old TVs negated those either. That is my understanding of how it worked.

PCM audio is more advanced, for sure, as NNR has said. I enjoy good PCM sound in games. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs arcade is all PCM and it's great. The sound chip in the SNES is good. It just may have been ahead of its time. The way it was implemented on the SNES, it was bottlenecked by both RAM and ROM, and that led to it being held back in some ways. The Genesis has a few quirks of its sound design that could have been improved as well. Both systems, as I understand it, have managed impressive feats never heard in the 90s thanks to the efforts of hobbyists.

"Overall best system. I think that should remain undecided."

I agree. Objectivity only goes so far here, both technically and with the game libraries. I just like to counter common misconceptions. People say the Genesis had a "terrible" sound chip despite many great soundtracks, or the SNES was better at everything, or that Mode 7 was more than it was.

Clearly Sega won the console wars. In fact I'm gonna head to my local Game Stop after work and grab the newest Sega conso-- Oh. Wait...

@darasin, @sdelfin But the TV didn't negate that. Sure there was overscan that caused, say, a literal 240p to only have 224p of real-life usable space, but the higher resolution still resulted in more real-life usable space on-screen than the lower resolution equivalent, and no, that was not all consumed by the overscan area. It also, as I mentioned before, resulted in greater density in the sprite, where the lower resolution on the SNES resulted in more "diffused" sprites which look much worse to my eyes in general. In an overwhelming majority of cases, I would rather have tighter sprites that seem smaller to the eye, than bigger (to the eye), and "looser" sprites. But that's subjective on my part (just as the opposite on your part is also subjective).

Old CRT TVs weren't "fixed pixel" like our modern flat panel TVs are. So when a modern TV with a 1080p panel is displaying a 720p image, it's applying some multiplicative algorithm to upscale 720p worth of pixels (again, too lazy to math) to fill 1080p worth of pixels, resulting in somewhat of a smeary image. In the case of 720p to 1080p, the difference is subtle enough that the image still looks okay, but when your run old consoles with their usually sub-480p resolution on them, this fixed-pixel upscaling is one half of the equation on why they look just awful (the other half is missing scanlines that the game artists designed their images around). This is why, in addition to a handful of 1080p, and 720p TVs around the house and one 4K TV, I also hang onto a mid-90's 36" Toshiba 4x3 480i convex glass CRT "tube" TV where I play every console Wii and older. It's the only way that old games truly look "right".

On CRT, this fixed pixel thing isn't an issue - because the pixels aren't fixed. When the signal is 256x240, or 320x240, that's actually what you're getting. It's why both resolutions look crisp. The precise science of exactly how a cathode ray tube achieves this is totally beyond me, and is irrelevant to our discussion anyway other than to say that no, the added resolution is NOT wasted on the TV. Actually, if anything, the flexibility of CRT makes the resolution difference MORE significant because of pixel density and how it relates to how tight or how diffuse a character sprite looks.

And now to the matter of resolution vs color depth being "more or less valuable" for the betterment of the visual experience overall. This matter is the larger part subjective (which I'm really going to the greatest of pains to "throw out of the courtroom" here as much as possible) and the smaller part contextual. Secret of Mana probably benefits more from the colors than it would from the resolution where Sonic definitely benefits more from the resolution than it would the colors. So there is a little bit of context that we should keep factored-in. But for the most part, which one "makes for better visuals" should probably be factored-out because it's way more a matter of taste than anything.

However, there's one aspect of that question that we should definitely examine, and it's the matter of which is [quote unquote] "heavier" or "more taxing" or "more demanding" on a system's resources, which one requires "more power" from a system in order to pull it off: more colors, and more special effects, or higher resolution and more sprites? Answer? The latter. The latter is the one that requires "more power". The color counts are not really dependent on processing power, but just on the size of the database of available colors. You program in a color's code, and it retrieves it. Easy lifting. And the mode effects are not super power-intensive either. Consider the mode 7-centric F-Zero. The track that your cars run on is basically a character sprite itself that it zooms in at the proper angle to make it appear that you're riding on it. To put it super crassly, "you're a car, driving on the surface of another car". And because of the zooming and scaling, you don't even necessarily have to have a humongous sprite. Consider the boss battle in stage 1 of Jim Power. It's a mode 7 affair on the SNES with scaling and all of that, but it's ultimately a teeny sprite. The Genesis and Amiga versions don't feature that kinda scaling, but just use a giant character sprite. Which one is more power demanding (at least on the CPU)? The latter one. And add to that the fact that despite carrying the significantly heavier load, the Genesis is STILL faster and smoother running ....that's incredibly telling.

The SNES is actually pushing much less "real stuff", just with much greater abilities to "play with it". But for every SNES game that makes any meaningful use of the mode effects, there's what, 20-50 that don't? That number is a guess on my part, but the point stands, it's a feature and function that is unused more often than it's used. The higher resolution in the Genesis, the higher number of sprites, the generally bigger, more detailed sprites, on the other hand, are things that were used the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the time on the Genesis. Mode effects are the exception on SNES, not the rule. Resolution and sprites on Genesis are the rule, not the exception. And most of the Genesis games that do use the lower resolution and the fewer sprites are multiplatform games, so not at all a case where the SNES is rising to Genesis parity, but a case where the Genesis is stooping to SNES parity ("tying the Genny's hands behind its back", as I said before).

Anyway, what have I been saying all along? "The SNES is 'more advanced', and the Genesis is 'more powerful'". Both of these are facts, and hopefully you can see now how that is so. Which one yields the best results out of their side of the dynamic is, as I've also said repeatedly, almost entirely subjective (which we dismiss), and a little bit contextual (which we've already dealt with).

However, at the end of the day, it was never delf or I's goal to ever change your mind on which system you PREFERRED, or which audio and visual experience was more pleasing and satisfying....TO YOU. If you remain in a state of preferring the visuals and the sound of the SNES to that of the Genesis, we're not going to lose any sleep over that whatsoever. All we cared ever about, or at the very least, all -I- ever cared about was getting you to see that for every benefit the SNES brings to the table, the Genesis brings one as well, and that a position of "SNES is objectively, undeniably superior" is untenable. That they come out a wash in the end, or, as I said from my very first line in this entire conversation, "a stalemate"....that's really all I was ever trying to impress upon you.

Which one you "prefer" is irrelevant outside of the four walls of your house, just as delf and I's preference for the opposite is also meaningless. You see the Genesis graphics as gritty and colorless, and the sound as shrill and inaccessible. I look at the SNES visuals and see comparative nothingness hiding behind a thin veneer of awesomeness like Urkel stuffing his body builder outfit to look like The Hulk, and the sound, to me so very often sounds like a Casio coming from down the hall. But even so, at the end of the day, many times that thin veneer of awesomeness is still enough to do the trick, and not infrequently is the music in the hall still glorious. It's just, for me, even if it lacks all the sheen and gimmickry of the SNES, there is just so much more "meat on the bones" of the Genesis visuals behind the veneer, and such a greater velocity to them as well. And the music is crisper, cleaner, punchier, louder, bolder, and a lot more nuanced and fluid (even if it is confined to a much smaller piece of sonic real estate). And these are all virtues which I prize above the virtues offered by the other. You feel the opposite - and that's just fine. Just don't equate your personal enjoyment barrier to Genesis' FM soundscape with an objective inferiority out of it as a result - that's projecting, and is also a confusion of objective and subjective - or that the smaller color pallete and lack of mode 7 makes Genesis less powerful than the SNES when there's so much else going on to offset that....even if you personally get nothing out of that offsetting.

Your response to delf and Gunstar Heroes indicated that you missed his point completely. You said that even Treasure would, to paraphrase, "probably not be able to do the best SNES games on Genesis" when his whole point was to say that Gunstar Heroes, in the form in which we had it with all the sprites flying everywhere at breakneck speeds, in such a large play field (because of the resolution) and with larger, more detailed (albeit, more cartoony) character sprites which were also way more fluid and animated.....that such a game would've been UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE on SNES....that was his point. And he's absolutely, positively right! So many of the things that each system did would be impossible on the other - at least without MAJOR compromises and cut-backs. This is why I said that if we put DKC on Genesis or Vectorman on SNES that THE BOTH of them would be all the worse for it. Your responses seem to indicate that you well grasp the half of that equation that comports with your preferences, and you're not wrong insofar as you do....but your responses seem to also indicate a failure to truly grasp the opposite half of that equation which is every bit as much the truth. Now, again, those things may not matter to you PERSONALLY because you don't personally get anything out of them. But again, that's subjective and utterly worthless to the question at hand. Simply that they exist - and with pervasiveness is what we've labored to demonstrate.

Our mission in this running dialog, or again, -MY- mission in it has only been to get you to concede that it's a two-way street with this contest, not a one-way, and that declaring an absolute objectively superior winner here is a fool's errand because it's too give and take, it's too apples and oranges. That's all. I was never after anything more than just that. And comparing your first reply to me, Dar, with your final one to delf (or final as of the initiation of my writing this - a good deal of time has elapsed between start and finish and who knows what's been said in-between), it seems as if delf and I have succeeded in this aim. In your first response to me, you said [paraphrased] "I'm glad you love the Genesis so much", but the SNES is clearly the superior system". In your last response, you said [also paraphrased] "Which one is objectively best is unknown".....or something to that effect.....

......I dunno, delf, it sounds like our work here is done! Time to start talking about Turbografx!

But as has also been said - by me, by delf, and by others is that in our day and age, we can have both, and benefit from the vastly different treasures and wonders of both, which really only serve to compliment each other wonderfully. They're the "yin and yang" of gaming, and the universe is simply not complete without both. The only REAL losers here, and I can't put this into words strongly enough - these people are "effin LEEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOSERS", L-shaped hand-gesture to the forehead losers"......are the ones who refuse to participate in both, clinging so desperately to their one or the other that they deprive themselves of the joys of the 2nd. THOSE are the losers here. Those and those alone.

One last thing, Dar: Mortal Kombat. You're asking about why the characters still seem so much smaller on the Genesis, and feel like the resolution difference is not enough to fully answer the question. You're right. Google a side by side which shows the full screen of both. Now, I'll draw your attention to two things:

1) where on the screen are the characters' feet? You'll notice that on the Genesis, the feet are almost all the way to the bottom of the screen, and therefore, the playfield proper occupies the bottom half of the screen. On the SNES, the feet are about 1/3rd of the way up the screen, meaning the playfield is the middle half of the screen, more or less.

2) The player's energy bars are much larger on the SNES, and therefore, extend further down from the top of the screen. By contrast, the energy bars on the Genesis version are really thin, and really "hug" the top of the screen.

Now let me ask you, what happens to the space between the top of the characters' heads and the bottom of the energy bars? On the SNES version, that space is very small. In fact, if memory serves, when you jump, you even enter into that space a little. On the Genesis version, that space between the tip of the head and the bottom of the bar is waaaaaaaay bigger, and you don't even reach it when being uppercut.

So this is why the Genesis characters seem so much smaller beyond what the resolution would account for when they are actually the same size. As I said right at the beginning of our talks about Mortal Kombat, it's not a size difference issue, it's a matter of forced perspective. Might I have wished they did it on Genesis more like how they did it on SNES? Yeah, maybe. The SNES approach feels a little "cheaty" to me, and the Genesis version's approach does allow for more background details. But it also makes the most important part of the visuals - the characters themselves seem a lot smaller (even though they're not). Yeah, the SNES approach here was probably the better one, all things considered. Oh, and as far as MK2 goes, I was simply trying to highlight how the characters in the Genesis version are actually bigger "for realsies". The Genesis version cuts corners elsewhere. But at the time, the question was "why didn't the Genesis version of Mortal Kombat make its characters bigger to offset the resolution?" and I was just simply trying to show that they did do so for the second go-round.

Cheers!

@Webheadd wamp wamp. :-/

@Darasin I just had a look at Neo Geo specs as it has been a while since I last looked. It turns out the Neo Geo is 320x224, with many games coming up a bit short at 304x224. Either way, still higher resolution than typical SNES games. I forgot it was that. I just wanted to correct that.

Also, I have been sifting through some specific examples of what I consider good Genesis tunes. I do intend to provide those examples if you're still interested. However, if you have determined that you just don't like the FM sound, then I don't want to bother you since I'm not out to make a convert out of you or anything like that.

@NerdNoiseRadio don't tempt me by inviting discussion of turbografx. I've done lots of reading up on the workings of the PC Engine as well and this discussion could easily get further out of hand as far as adding even more mountains of text to this. However, my quick summary of my view of the PCE is that it's possibly the most elegantly designed system at a hardware level with its simplicity. Also, while it doesn't have my favorite sound chip, or sound hardware that can be considered the most advanced, I describe its sound as, possibly, the most consistently pleasant. I could also go on and on about Neo Geo. It has such a fascinating sprite setup. The Neo Geo is too beefy to care about such silliness as background layers.

@sdelfin So, I'm gonna be tied up for the next couple hours and unable to "really" reply. But I definitely would love to talk about Neo Geo and TG16!

Spoiler: we're in almost complete agreement. I think we might disagree just slightly enough to make it a little more interesting than "Yep." "Yeeeeeep." "MmmmmHMmMmmm."

@Darasin @sdelfin To prevent the risk of "overly shameless self-promotion" and "overly beating a drum", I'll make it a point to avoid making repeated mentions of this, but Dar, if you're not completely ruined on the idea of FM forever by now, I'd recommend Episode 2 especially, but also episodes 7, 12 (not entirely FM), 13, and coming late October - episode 17 of my podcast Nerd Noise Radio. Avail on YouTube, iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher, Buzzsprout, Podbean, Blogspot, Twitter, Facebook, Google +, and Archive.org. Delf, as a fellow fan of FM, I'd also be interested in knowing what you think.

Okay, end shameless self-promotion! Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

@speedracer216 awesome!

So, here's the details on the series I wrote (again, no longer online):

The magazine: "RetrogamingTimesMonthly"

The title of the series: "Fanboyism and the 16-bit Console Wars".

Pseudonym I wrote under: "Des Gamer".

Standout feature: I am probably the first - and last person in the history of the universe to use comparative studies of mid-sized US city skylines - particularly Des Moines, Omaha, Cedar Rapids, and Mobile as analogies for the software libraries of the SNES, Genesis, TG16, and Neo Geo.....very strange analogy....but surprisingly effective! Omaha was SNES, Des Moines was Genesis, Cedar Rapids was TG16, and Mobile was Neo Geo.

Does that sound like the series you read? Wouldn't that be "it's a small world" awesome if it was?

[edit] p.s. Genesis is my favorite of these software libraries, and Des Moines is my favorite of the mentioned skylines......of course, I'm a passionate Des Moineser, so there's that!

@NerdNoiseRadio Thanks for the reminder. I did want to check that out. I'll have to squeeze it in as I'm behind on many things due to my own curiosity and procrastination, but I'll start looking into it tomorrow.

I did just stumble upon part one of your feature, the Preamble Ramble. I recall reading it before. I searched the title in Google and it came up as second result with a link of "RTM 107 - Des Gamer" I skimmed it a bit. Neo Geo can be a boring topic, but with the right angle, I think it could be interesting. It might be a sprite monster, but it deals with them like no other piece of hardware I know. But I don't want to get ahead of myself.