that would be the genesis
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
24 years later, which console is powerful graphically--Genesis or SNES?
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
that would be the genesis
It should probably be clarified whether we're talking about actual sprites or backgrounds masquerading as sprites from a technical point of view. Things tend to get very mixed up here. IIRC the SNES only does hardware scaling and rotations on backgrounds, correct?
yup, the only games that actually scale sprites use extra hardware, like Yoshi's Island. Typically a math coprocessor or something like the DSP which does matricies math.
The Genesis had tons of games that did sprite scaling within the Genesis CPU.
FlyingSaucer
Banned
Genesis had bigger sprites (take a look at Samurai Shodown) but the SNES had more colors and games were prettier to look at.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I'm so confused. Was there a title change? What? Why?
More like why is this thread still going.
Incidentally here is a funny ROM hack that scales the shit out of Sonic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcrIV1k1jrs
Seems to work by treating the sprite as a background layer, seeing as the regular background is gone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcrIV1k1jrs
Seems to work by treating the sprite as a background layer, seeing as the regular background is gone.
I don't think so. What's more likely happening is that they aren't drawing the background at all because Sonic the Hedgehog spends so many CPU cycles on the background to begin with. All Parallax sheering, color rotation, tile animation etc is done in the CPU.
"16-bit" graphics are at their most attractive when you're free to use a lot of colors, so SNES is the winner here. The Mega Drive had some advantages but when you have most games using a limited color palette + that crappy sound chip = the SNES comes off as much more capable in the big picture.
I think wicked linescrolling tricks trump number of colors on screen, stuff that can't really be shown off very well in still images that people familiarize themselves with. Give me the special effects in stuff like Thunder Force III or Shinobi 3, or crazy shit like Alien Soldier or Sub Terrania any day.
He meant PS3 had a higher ceiling but reaching it was very hard and few developers managed to do it. For multi platforms, 360 relative ease of optimization made for better results despite PS3 having the theoretical possibility of doing better.
The color thing is interesting to me and I don't really agree that the most amount of colors is the defining factor of good retro/pixelart graphics. To be honest, at a casual glance I would say that the color differences between the two aren't as pronounced as the pure numbers suggest. Typically I need to actively look to percieve a notable difference.
What I find fascinating about it is how the limitations of colors on the Genesis and lack thereof on the SNES resulted in different kinds of visual aesthetics. On the Genesis, artists generally would reserve several color slots for general use such as a greyscale with black and white being universally applied for highlights and shadows/outlines. Whereas on the SNES, you could afford to give just about every object/sprite their own dedicated color palette. So a character that is let's say purple on the SNES would be more likely to use a dark purple for outlines and shadows and a light purple for highlights. This approach led to a generally "softer" graphical look on SNES titles whereas Genesis games had more of a sharp high contrast look. Personally I tend to favor the latter more in terms of visual style.
That isn't to say a higher color output isn't better though, since it objectively is and you could just as well accomplish the other type of look if that's what you wanted. Just talking about the practical implications of the specs. I do think that the 64 color limit really separated the talented and clever artists from the rest even more though. A game like Sonic 2 never really feels like it's starved of color or that it's actively trying to work against the hardware limitations.
The sound debate I have already written an essay's worth of insight on in other threads.
You know, I didn't think there was a game that is known to have pushed for the graphics ceiling (on both systems) with good tech/taxing settings, then I remembered there is one that can be compared. The port of the game to both systems was very well done.
360 frame grabs
There isn't any other really demanding cross-platform game that could be compared as well. I still think either system could run the other systems games if exclusive. The talent of the developers really comes into play...as does the style/type/art direction of the game.
Crysis 3 isn't a great example, both versions had horrendous frame rates. The game looked terrible on both 360 and PS3 while running. In a screen grab it looks nice, but in motion it was too obviously trying to do too much with the hardware. Cleaner games like Halo 4 and Killzone 3 looked much better, albeit with less effects and not in a screen shot.
not only that, but the crystal clear displays that people use today through emulation or RGB mods isn't how genesis games were intended to look. Utilizing NTSC/PAL color blur on a CRT television and stipple shading or dithering, the console appeared to produce many more colors and transparencies than technically possible. Games look entirely different with even a 1 radius blur applied to the picture compared to crystal clear sharpness. Artists expected and took advantage of the natural blurriness of the screen.
This is not what the game was supposed to look like on a CRT television.
curiouscharles
Member
i kind of agree with both sides here, but the increased colour count on the SNES certainly did make it "easier" on the eyes when playing.
that being said, some of the things happening on screen with the Genesis were much more impressive / engaging - was always a bit of a toss up for me between the two systems [and i wasn't allowed to own either of them 'cause parents].
Cute Dragon Here
Member
not only that, but the crystal clear displays that people use today through emulation or RGB mods isn't how genesis games were intended to look. Utilizing NTSC/PAL color blur on a CRT television and stipple shading or dithering, the console appeared to produce many more colors and transparencies than technically possible. Games look entirely different with even a 1 radius blur applied to the picture compared to crystal clear sharpness. Artists expected and took advantage of the natural blurriness of the screen.
This is not what the game was supposed to look like on a CRT television.
Out of curiosity, I sometime do wonder about whether there existed SNES games that also made use of the said screen property. (I'm feeling it's a "yes" too. Don't know if that's really the case, too.)
On the CRT part, I wonder if CRT outputs have become less blurry as time went on? I don't remember PS1, PS2, or Wii games having "blur" of that sort over composite, though I wonder how much have to do with the CRTs being also recent ones (2000-ish) and the latter two systems being mostly 480i/p...
It really does show that what kind of games are the best on what kind of platforms
I've always really liked the RPGs that showed up on the SNES, to be honest. A lot of things just feels so cohesive and they're still mighty playable and not look bad on whatever hardware you have. (Is it a bad thing that I got my first exposure to them... as GBA games?)Yes, some SNES games used dithering to create new shades of colors. Even though the SNES could display more colors at once, that doesn't mean it can display any and all colors that exist. Some SNES games use dithering as well, and the SNES's transparency effect is actually more limited in use than people realize. As such, using dithering to fake transparency is done in a few SNES games, too.
The reason it's not used as much, or why later systems don't seem to rely on it, is because once your master palette is big enough, you can get away with only a few colors on screen at once. The Genesis' weakness isn't that it can only display about 64 colors at once, its weakness is that it can only choose from 512 colors to begin with. That doesn't leave a lot of room for clean, smooth transitions from one color to the next. The PC Engine and SNES have much better looking master palettes, but even games on those systems aren't typically pushing more colors on screen than an average Genesis game, at least not by an enormous difference. Once you have enough colors to choose from, you don't have to create half-steps from two existing colors. You can just use the actual shade you're trying to approximate.
And actually, the systems you mentioned did utilize the blurring dithering effect of crt televisions of the time. This is because they would have internal color palettes of, say, 24-bit color, but would output in a much lower quality bitrate to reduce the amount of time it would take to DMA to the video processor. The image you are seeing is usually 16-bit color, or 18-bit color, or some lower bitrate. As such, if you look at the raw video coming out, it is actually dithered. You just never noticed!
curiouscharles
Member
It really does show that what kind of games are the best on what kind of platforms
toooooootally.
i remember loving fighters on the genesis - even because of the lower colour count [making games like MK2 have this gritty feel the snes couldn't replicate with its clean display].
Zombie James
Banned
Donkey Kong Country comes to mind.
HappehLemons
Member
SNES games looked way better then Genesis, but Genesis ran games faster. I like the Genesis more but there's no denying how good some of these SNES games looked.
I understand this is filtered on an emulator, but it just looks timeless.
I understand this is filtered on an emulator, but it just looks timeless.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Thanks for the clarification
Hmm, guess sometimes you should never trust your eyes! (Hmm, what about S-Video/component out? Hooked to LCDs?)
Speaking of graphical "tricks" I think there are probably a bunch of GBA and DS games that took "advantage" of the LCDs they're on are... rather slow in response times, too.
PS1 used some fairly pervasive dithering in the way it rendered things. Take a look at this image of MGS1:
(It also really drives home the point of why I generally don't like playing old 3D games in higher native resolutions...)
This is precisely what I am describing. Emulators can do really cool stuff like forgoing the decrease in color depth and display a cool, crisp 24-bit image. And some of the better RGB converters will do things like adding scanlines to mask the effect. But the actual hardware of the time, outputting via composite out? Totally dithered. It allowed the image to be sent to the video processor in shorter amount of time.
I've never tried S-video or component on any of those old consoles. I play mine on an actual real-deal CRT television with composite out, the way they were intended. That said, I do run my dreamcast to my TV via S-video out, and I can indeed see individual pixels because it runs at a higher resolution. Part of the reason the colors blur is because these older consoles ran at low resolutions (240p or so). So I would imagine a PSX would have noticeable dithering if it outputted at a higher resolution, otherwise the natural scaling of the image would still cause color distortion to a degree, in all likelyhood.
Its not exactly like the genesis had much of a choice, the only cartridge tech I can remember was virtua racer, and that thing was like a foot long.
Well... unless...
THE POWAAAAAHHH!!!!!
SNES games looked way better then Genesis, but Genesis ran games faster. I like the Genesis more but there's no denying how good some of these SNES games looked.
I understand this is filtered on an emulator, but it just looks timeless.
Neither system really has much of a problem presenting stylized graphics in that manner. And of course it scales up really well with filters.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
All that talk makes me kind of want to have some kind of... filter that I can apply to any video game just for kicks. To simulate an "imperfect" CRT over an "imperfect" composite connection.
Now that I think about it I think a bunch of things discussed here probably explains why Game Boy Advance games (that started there instead of being a port) tend to have a different look compared to SNES games that were also developed and released first for themselves.
The difference between an "imperfect" CRT and the things you can do to take advantage of that, compared to a "perfect" grid of LCD pixels... Or is it the generally relaxed palette, video memory, and storage limits instead?
I pretty much grew up with the Game Boy Advance and it took me all along my later primary and early secondary years.
Its not exactly like the genesis had much of a choice, the only cartridge tech I can remember was virtua racer, and that thing was like a foot long.
Well... unless...
THE POWAAAAAHHH!!!!!
It was a cost decision. Genesis games would typically retail for about $20 less than their SNES counterparts. Sega used the Genesis' speedy processor to make games cheaper. They could do things like run complex image decompression routines so that they could fit more art into smaller cartridges. Late in the SNES' life, they would add co-processors to do this with Street Fighter Alpha 2, and it wound up making the game cost like $100.
At times, the difference was so dramatic that, as an example, Earthworm Jim wound up receiving an entire extra level with the space they had left over.
stan423321
Member
You're aware why Yoshi's Island is a terrible example, correct?
It has a co-processor on cartridge. And unlike NES, it's impossible to argue that was the norm for SNES.
No, you've hit the nail on the head. These games of the era we're speaking about were designed with imperfect CRTs as their target. Once you start working with crystal clear displays, you change your art direction quite a bit. It's like considering your canvas, the type of video being output needs to be tailored to it. This is actually something about Virtual Reality that most can't grasp. You have to actually approach the headset from a different design perspective than you would a conventional screen.
The filters you are talking about exist. Most modern emulators will allow plugins for video filters. Just look for anything labeled "NTSC composite" and you'll find a filter that'll approximate the look of a CRT of the time.
ldcommando
Banned
Snes
Cute Dragon Here
Member
The talk about the Genny and the SNES just keeps making me thinking "what about the Game Boy Advance?" for some reason. Then again, I'm mostly too young to have properly played either 16-bitter at their prime time.
If it is.... Its only a matter of time until Johnny Turbo shows up uninvited....
GBA had a much faster processor than anything from the 16-bit era, as well as cartridge space around 2-4x of what you could fit on late gen 16-bit cartridges. Of course, most GBA games were visually designed to compensate for the lack of a backlit screen on the first generation GBA so color-wise they all end up looking rather garish on proper screens.
The difference between the Super NES and the Sega Genesis, in terms of both their graphical and audio capabilities, is the difference between a fixed function pipeline and programmable shaders. By which I mean the SNES came stock with a bunch of tricks it could do in hardware very easily, but it's weak CPU limited the ability for programmers to actually create new functions and still run the game at the same time. By comparision, the Sega Genesis came with few stock tricks, but it had an incredibly fast CPU at it's disposal that was very well suited to being able to do complex math (where the SNES is deficient) that allowed programmers to create their own tricks.
This applies to both audio and video.
The GBA is the best of both worlds. It has a very fast CPU compared to either of the systems we are discussing, and can do complex math at ease. And it has capable video hardware, and a big color palette. It's the best of both worlds.
I love the PC Engine, but it should be compared to the NES, MSX2, and Sega Master System. It is a super charged 8-bit machine. In any sort of math heavy context, be it with co processors or speedy CPU, it can't compete. Even the vanilla SNES CPU will outshine.
Journey
Banned
Right, it's like the same question for X1 and PS4 and someone said, look at Ryse.
We don't know what the talent and skills of ND would achieve on 360 unless attempted. What we could do is look at games that go beyond the capabilities of both PS3 and 360, a PC game that pushes the boundaries and was ported to both. Does anyone have such examples?
You joke but it was. When I got Sega Channel I was in heaven. That was probably the coolest service Sega ever offered. I had it from launch until the day they ended the serivce in my area.
Boss Mog
Member
PS Triple
look at this man's beard.
Is this a joke? I would hope by now that everybody knows that almost all TLoU cutscenes on PS3 do not use in game models and textures and are all videos and not rendered in real-time on the PS3. So If you wanna post TLoU shots to showcase what the PS3 can do then post in-game shots because posting a pic of a video is just sad.
Malitik Sabu
Banned
Natively genesis, snes was designed to expand hardware through cartridges. The Snes had more color though.
Every system can do this. This has been the norm since the days of the MSX. It's not a special design consideration of the SNES.
Malitik Sabu
Banned
SNES games looked way better then Genesis, but Genesis ran games faster. I like the Genesis more but there's no denying how good some of these SNES games looked.
I understand this is filtered on an emulator, but it just looks timeless.
This is a game that couldn't run on the she's without expanded hardware. At east in its present state.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Speaking of the SNES having a slow CPU, did Kirby Super Star slow down anyway when it had a lot of characters despite it coming with a whole another CPU as a coprocessor or something like that? I think that game only managed to get out in a perfectly fluid form on a DS.
Malitik Sabu
Banned
I'm saying comparing yoshis island to sonic 1 doesn't make sense.
While what you say is true, snes did focus a bit on that. Nes did as well, smb3 can't run on native new hardware for example.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Perhaps so, but I should note that on the MES/Famicom you are pretty much required to have a mapper somewhere in there I think to achieve anything like the games you do see.