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.
" Games like Yoshis island have a bunch of really cool looking graphical effects tha tstill stand out today. (awesome wobbly ghost with patchwork heart) "
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.
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.
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.
" 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.
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.
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.
@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!
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.
Log in to comment