#1 Posted by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -

I know both are 16bit, but which of the two usually had the better graphics? which had the better looking ports?
#2 Posted by eroticfishcake (7782 posts) -

Well the SNES had Mode 7 which was pretty rad.

#3 Posted by sgjackson (527 posts) -
@eroticfishcake said:
" Well the SNES had Mode 7 which was pretty rad. "
And the Genesis had bullsh...er, Blast Processing!
#4 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -

SNES, could display much more colors from a larger palette.  More sprites I believe too, but it's been a while since I looked at those specs.  Had more hardware features like mode 7.  Super FX came on pretty early, and FX2 was generally better than that Sega chip they had in Virtua Racing.
 
SNES versions almost always came out way ahead Genesis in multiplatform games.

#5 Posted by Hailinel (23868 posts) -

Wow.  It's like 1992 all over again.

#6 Posted by eroticfishcake (7782 posts) -
@sgjackson: They've got what Nintendon't!
 
Blast processing. Shit. Sounds like the term "Eye-blasters" Jeff was talking about before.
#7 Posted by GunstarRed (5022 posts) -

SNES without a doubt I had MK2 on both  and the SNES version was far , far superior graphically (and soundwise) 
 
Games like Yoshis island have a bunch of really cool looking graphical effects tha tstill stand out today. (awesome wobbly ghost with patchwork heart)
#8 Posted by RichardLOlson (1852 posts) -

SNES had the better graphics for me.  Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, and Secret of Evermore!

#9 Posted by calidan777 (853 posts) -

Yeah, I was a Genesis owner, but I couldn't deny the superiority of the SNES graphics.

#10 Posted by Southgrove (322 posts) -

SNES! And why is this not a poll?

#11 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@Southgrove said:
" SNES! And why is this not a poll? "
Because it is a question of facts.
#12 Posted by joey (979 posts) -
@marioncobretti said:
" Games like Yoshis island have a bunch of really cool looking graphical effects tha tstill stand out today. (awesome wobbly ghost with patchwork heart) "
That game is amazing.
#13 Posted by gingertastic_10 (4141 posts) -

SNES. I've always like the graphics on that system best.

#14 Posted by TheGreatGuero (9130 posts) -

SNES was the ultimate.

#15 Posted by TobyD81 (1227 posts) -

SNES, no contest.

#16 Posted by HistoryInRust (6274 posts) -

The SNES rendered objects a bit more clearly than the Genesis. But the greater discrepancy was between the system's respective sound capabilities. SNES, internally, was a much stronger machine overall.

#17 Posted by Hamst3r (4451 posts) -

SNES. Always.

#18 Posted by Raven_Sword (3438 posts) -

Im probaly going to go buy a SNES in a week or two. I jsut need money for the syestem adn a game first. Im sure I can find some cheap games on EBAY or something, but the place im getting the syestem from has games like SF 2 Turbo for 13, Megaman X for 19, and Super Mario world and Allstars for 15 and 18 or 20 I think.
#19 Posted by jonnyboy (2920 posts) -

Having played them both as a kid I remember the SNES had better resolution, but the Megadrive could put out more low res images per second so it looked more fluid (I guessing that's where the 'blast processing' term came from). The SNES had a better sound chip from what I remember too. That said I preferred the awesome shreddy digitized syth guitar sound that came on practically all Megadrive games. Thinking about it I preferred The Megadrive across the board.

#20 Edited by Jeust (10473 posts) -
@jonnyboy said:

" Having played them both as a kid I remember the SNES had better resolution, but the Megadrive could put out more low res images per second so it looked more fluid (I guessing that's where the 'blast processing' term came from). The SNES had a better sound chip from what I remember too. That said I preferred the awesome shreddy digitized syth guitar sound that came on practically all Megadrive games. Thinking about it I preferred The Megadrive across the board. "

Me too and i had a snes... Blasphemy i know, but at the time the megadrive seemed superior to me.  
 
And almost everyone i knew had a megadrive (genesis). 
 
Also generally the most violent games, appeared censored on the snes, while in full splendor in the megadrive.
#21 Edited by Kajaah117 (1070 posts) -

Consoles don't have graphics, games do. From what I remember though, I think the SNES was a more powerful system and had more graphically impressive games.

#22 Posted by teh_pwnzorer (1482 posts) -
@Raven_Sword:   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_videogame_console_palettes     
 
For static images, SNES wins.  In some games (say Weaponlord), you'd get more frames of animation and a higher resolution in the Genesis version: 
http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/Weaponlord.htm  
  
...and I don't remember a side-scroller for the SNES that scrolled as fast as the Sonic games.
#23 Posted by Black_Rose (7785 posts) -

SNES definitely, F-Zero is proof of that.

#24 Posted by Wildcard (14 posts) -
@RichardLOlson said:
" SNES had the better graphics for me.  Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, and Secret of Evermore! "
How could you list those and not include Final Fantasy VI?! For shame!
#25 Posted by Linkyshinks (9881 posts) -

PC Engine.

#26 Posted by Systech (4078 posts) -

They were both pretty balanced when it came to graphics, but I'm going to have to lean towards Genesis when it comes to that.

#27 Posted by Bucketdeth (8004 posts) -

Snes, it was a lot more colorful and just seemed to have a little bit of a edge.

#28 Edited by ninjakiller (3405 posts) -

@Hailinel said: " Wow. It's like 1992 all over again. " 
 
As I recall SNES had a larger color palette, but the Genesis had faster processing. Also, thanks to Nintendo being squeamish little waa waa babies about blood they put out the shitty bloodless version of Mortal Kombat forever cementing its rep as kiddie system. YEAH, LET'S REFIGHT THE CONSOLE WARS OF THE EARLY 90'S BITCHES!

#29 Posted by teh_pwnzorer (1482 posts) -
@Linkyshinks said:
" PC Engine. "
You gotta be kidding me.  Neo Geo wins. :P  And by the late 90s, it became free...in a sense... (in the neoragex sense.)
#30 Edited by JeffGoldblum (3699 posts) -

 
The SNES was technically more impressive than the Genesis. Fact.
BUT the Genesis had blast processing so it's a tie.

#31 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@Kajaah117 said:
Consoles don't have graphics, games do. From what I remember though, I think the SNES had more graphically impressive games.
Consoles have graphical capabilities, and SNES was far ahead.  Back then developers were more likely to take advantage of the strengths too, these days it just costs too much and takes too much time. 
 
@Linkyshinks said:
PC Engine.
Technically weaker than SNES or Genesis, actually.  But it did have some good stuff, obviously.
#32 Posted by JJOR64 (18906 posts) -

FUCK BOTH OF THEME!!  ATARI JAGUAR FOR THE FUCKING WIN BABY!!

#33 Posted by PenguinDust (12450 posts) -

Genesis had blood.  (yeah, I was a Sega guy ;-D)

#34 Posted by Fallen189 (4940 posts) -

May I remind you that Genesis does what Nintendon't