Romulus
Member
That's the worst word salad yet. I'm making assumptions but these are just outright guesses.. The fact is, Sega needed MORE than adds on to compete. Why? Not even that worked.
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Did the Super Nintendo actually win the 16-Bit war?
- Thread starter German Hops
- Start date
That's the worst word salad yet. I'm making assumptions but these are just outright guesses.. The fact is, Sega needed MORE than adds on to compete. Why? Not even that worked.
Romulus
Member
Yeah, that would be silly to have that many add-on chips when they had.... add-on hardware too. But yet they still did it. lol
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
My only issue was with the number of 16.7 or whatever the guy said before.
You can argue that's what they added later, but that misses the point that the Sega CD was announced before any of those decisions were made, so it was already going to exist and the SNES had nothing to do with the hardware that was coming but at best, changes made to the hardware over time before release.
It was not a decent second, it was marginally ahead of the N64.
Sony was ahead before FFviii came out, Sega was already seeing lower shipments which you are correct, they were using in place of Sold, so they were actually selling worse than they looked like which was already bad. But to say games like those weren't present on the Saturn doesn't make sense to me, the Saturn was filled with Jrpgs. The N64 had one?
I believe you are overselling the Saturn in Japan and I mean extremely. If the same games on the PSX suddenly weren't selling inn the Saturn, and people would rather buy an N64 that had none of those games on the Saturn, there's only one reason consumers in the earlier years brought a Saturn, and that was because there was excitement for playing 3D arcade games like Virtua Fighter at home. The Playstation proved it had 3D covered, and several popular 2D games in genres that Japanese people would buy, Sega also had these, but a couple years from launch those were no longer incentives to buy the Saturn, but where for the Playstation. The N64 didn't have them, and it's limited library was more attractive to buyers than the same game they brought on the PlayStaton, on the Saturn.
This should immediately make someone ask the question, who were the Japanese gamers that were buying the Saturn in the first place? The only answer is people who were attractive by the excitement of owning 3D arcade games that can finally be played on a home consoles and as you say, they would buy other games with the Saturns higher attach rate, not 16.7 but higher. The consoles sales dropped once Virtua Fighter 2's appeal wore off and you can actually track this yourself buy looking at the software sales once that happened, the software after that game, the best selling title on the Saturn, all dropped like flies and got worse and worse each FY.
It's not a case of the games being bad because many of these games were practically the game as the ports on the PlayStation, the problem was that Sega only had one game series responsible for shifting consoles, both were Virtua Fighter titles. This same exact thing happened in the United States with Sonic and the Genesis but in the opposite way, the Genesis started out slow instead of fast, and the 3p games that were best sellers during those times the sales were high were released later instead of early like the Saturn, but once Sonic sales collapsed so did the consoles sales and the other game software, this happened in Japan with Virtua Fighter.
The real question is why did this happen a second time, even in another country, in almost the exact same way? That's something I've been trying to figure out myself.
What i suspect is that, perhaps Sega when they have a software title that is associated with a rise in a consoles success and sales, they overdue it in marketing that game series using it as the flagship for the ENTIRE console and its library to the point that when the sales of that title end up failing, the flagship isn't there anymore and the consumers are hardwired to associate that with the console being out of favor, seeing less of a reason to buy one. If the game series that was synonymous with the Saturn was on decline than the Japanese consumer may have been led to believe due tot he marketing everything attached to the Saturn is in decline?
For example, in the US Sonic the Hedgehog was pushed more aggressively than anywhere else, it took two years of Sonic before Mortal Kombat came out, the first 3p game to sell a large number of units on the console. But then as Sonic sales dropped while still being marketed as the number one series and reason to own a Genesis, software sales fell. You had some titles selling millions riding off the peak but then you had a situation where a heavily marketed game with extensive media coverage like Vectorman can sell 500,000 units by the end of the year and then die overnight with apparently no more sales to gain from 20 million US households, it makes a person question how many of those 20 million consoles were still being used? You have Sega writing off $60 million of unsold Genesis inventory which creates more questions.
In Japan, Virtua Fighter was Japanese Sonic the Hedgehog. Doing research on the arcade scene in 1993, and the Saturn in 1994 and 1995 in Japan, it was marketed as, if not more aggressively than Sonic was, Sony in contrast was marketing several 2p and 3p games that were in multiple genres. It may be possible that the same thing that happened in the US with the Genesis, happened in Japan with the Saturn. How many of the 4 million Saturns in Japan in 1996 were still being used? The Dreamcasts sudden entrance in Japan resulted in further sales slowdown that ended with Sega clearing out inventory at discounted prices, and a year later, they would take losses on the Dreamcast with a bunch of unsold inventory.
A real head scratcher.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
No they didn't, they sold their best without Add ons, Add ons hampered sales outside 32X, and were ignored. The genesis reached it's ceiling without the add ons contributing much if at all, and you have no proof they needed addons to compete, you can't even prove the Sega CD (which was announced AFTER NECs already was shown off two years before) was made specifically because of the SNES, you're making highly improbable claims and guesses.That's the worst word salad yet. I'm making assumptions but these are just outright guesses.. The fact is, Sega needed MORE than adds on to compete. Why? Not even that worked.
Youc an criticize the add ons but saying they "needed" them to compete is completely and factually false.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Haha no
ReBurn
Gold Member
Those people are objectively wrong, though. They never get invited to parties, either.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
Really? I think I was invited to a few house parties back into the 90s while saying Super Metroid is the GOAT.
You find me a list, from a supposed neutral site and I'd bet lunch you see SNES games reading from 1 down before you get to a Mega Drive game.
ReBurn
Gold Member
oh man list wars is such a 16-bit thing
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
I know you are but what am I... Infinity
Romulus
Member
I'm not saying they needed to win as fact, they thought they needed it. You have no idea what factors contribute to their sales per month. They could have sold their best because there was a lack of competition. They felt they needed add ons and it failed. The fact was they needed more than that. Not add ons.
Last edited:
ReBurn
Gold Member
Dang I can't beat that. You win.
dcx4610
Member
Sega had a 2 year head start but Nintendo jumped to first place when the SNES came out. Sega briefly surpassed Nintendo with Mortal Kombat but then it died back down.
I know I barely touched my Genesis once I got the SNES. Despite them both being 16-bit, it was rare pretty for the Genesis version of a game to be better than the SNES one (with a few exceptions) and just felt like the logical progression. Looking at it with modern eyes, it's actually pretty amazing at how well the Genesis competed despite that 2 year gap which was an eternity in those days with how fast technology was progressing. The Genesis had a faster CPU which was forward thinking and allowed it compete longer than it probably should have. The 32X *should* have trounced the SNES and been what put Sega back on top but Sega gonna Sega and never gave it the time and software it needed.
I know I barely touched my Genesis once I got the SNES. Despite them both being 16-bit, it was rare pretty for the Genesis version of a game to be better than the SNES one (with a few exceptions) and just felt like the logical progression. Looking at it with modern eyes, it's actually pretty amazing at how well the Genesis competed despite that 2 year gap which was an eternity in those days with how fast technology was progressing. The Genesis had a faster CPU which was forward thinking and allowed it compete longer than it probably should have. The 32X *should* have trounced the SNES and been what put Sega back on top but Sega gonna Sega and never gave it the time and software it needed.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
Sega would have been best to ride out 1994 and 1995 with full Genesis support. All the Sega CD and 32X did was erode consumer confidence not to mention the rumblings of the Saturn on the horizon and split development resources. They took the pedal off the medal only to regret it later. They could have even used more custom chips inside cartridges instead of dividing and splitting their user base. If I recall, Sega themselves believed they needed addons to compete. There is something to be said for stability, which Sega lacked after 1993 and lost any mind share they had built.
Captain Toad
Banned
Is 50 really bigger than 30? Here's why I say no!
[Insert wall of word vomit here]
[Insert wall of word vomit here]
It's shipment data provided by the manufacturer.
It's the whole CD attachment line for PCE, opposed to the PCE consoles that incorporated the CD drive (Duo models).
Final hardware sell-in in Japan:
MD: 3.58M
PCE (not including DUO models): 3.77M
PCE (including DUO models): ~4.8M
The narrative that in Japan MD was in a distant (from the second place) third place isn't based on facts.
Here what it looks like a distant placement from the top spot in Japan:
MD: 3.58M
PCE (non including DUO models): 3.77M
PCE (including DUO models): ~4.8M
SFC: 17.17M
Last edited:
Stefan.North
Member
SNES had more of legendary titles (SMW, LttP, DKC2, SM, SMK, MMX, CT, FFVI ect.), but Sega had waaaaay to many great games.
If you would buy a system for 10 games, I would vote SNES, but if you were to plan buying 50 games or more, Sega would be as good of a choice if not better.
If you would buy a system for 10 games, I would vote SNES, but if you were to plan buying 50 games or more, Sega would be as good of a choice if not better.
cireza
Member
Weak consoles need chips. The only single time MD used a chip, it was for Virtua Racing and the console pushed a true 3D engine with a good resolution and framerate.
The MD was a well built console from the beginning, with BC for Master System games as well.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Sega never showed the add ons "needed to compete" support, it's a bad argument. The Sega CD in later years was clearly being supported for retention, if it was made to compete because they needed to then they would have canned it when it was clear it wasn't selling as anticipated
So are the many numbers I've seen.
Ok, but all the CD games were referred to being on CD ROM^2 unlless they were Super or Arcade CDs.
Famicom had a longer life than both, but no one is saying that they both weren't far from the winner.
But to act like the Mega Drive was close when NEC had sold through 2.5 million consoles in FY93 with 3 more FY shipments left, when the MD shipped 2.6 million in the same period isn't really close. Sega shippements declines quickly which makes me wonder how many of those shipped Mega Drives later actually sold. The official total for PCE is 5.8 btw, not sure where you got 4.8 from.
Genesis had massive support in 1994 and 1995 and weren't selling, more consoles. Sega CD was already a has been at that point and was being supported to retain some customers, the 32X actually did temporarily give some life to the Genesis so the blame it gets has never made sense to me.
Just like more Virtua Racing chips, Virtua Racing didn't sell very well compared to Starfox on SNES which sold more than a couple million. Vectorman had 500,000 sale after a large ad campaign but didn't have any legs and the sales dissolved. Sega in the US had $60 million written off of unsold Genesis inventory which shows that the Genesis dying off had nothing to do with Sega not trying or putting the foot off the pedal. Sega did not believe they needed addons to compete. Outside of the 32X, that argument holds little weight, it also ignores the add ons on the SNES which for some reason are ignored when Sega is brought up, and Nintendo DID think they needed those to compete because the cosole depended on them from the start.
Huh?
That was carried over from the NES, another weak consoles that needed chips and paled compared to the competition in base power.
Link to PC-FX having sold-in 500K in Japan?
PC-FX total sell-in in Japan as September 1997 is 290K (EDIT: fixed the date):
I have no idea what you are talking about.
The chart you've quoted previously contained only hardware shipment data.
5.8M include the CD add-on, as I've already stated PCE+DUO standalone consoles totaled around 4.8M in Japan.
The competition between PCE and MD standalone consoles was fairly head to head in Japan, PCE was always ahead but MD wasn't far behind.
On the contrary the difference between the two "CD" install-bases was large.
In fact the ratio between PC Engine CD players and Mega Drive CD players is similar to the ratio between Super Famicom and Mega Drive (nearly 5:1)
PCE and MD card/cart players in Japan:
PCE and MD CD players in Japan:
Last edited:
Farawayfromhell
Member
SNES for the win.
Omnipunctual Godot
Gold Member
The Genesis excelled at bringing arcade experience to home consoles. But in terms of games designed specifically for consoles, there was no contest in terms of quality and output.
I wasn't a fan of Sega games generally because arcade games often used cheap difficulty tactics and the continues were usually limited, more so than on the SNES.
I wasn't a fan of Sega games generally because arcade games often used cheap difficulty tactics and the continues were usually limited, more so than on the SNES.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
NEC spokesmen but they may not be as reliable.
However, I have seen famitsu numbers different too. You have Famitsu saying 290k, this source says that it's 400k
https://sites.google.com/site/gamedatalibrary/hardware-totals
and says the best selling game is Classmate 2 at 40,000 sold. They claim to have the number from Famitsu and sales for other consoles on he list seem to be legit when verifying.
I don't understand where you confusion is, it's a simple statement. Every game is printed on what NEC calls CD Rom^2, (Unless it's Super CD or Arcade CD games) it has nothing to do with hardware shipments. I'm fairly certain they did that in both the US and Japan so i don't think it's a language issue either, so when you said a CD Rom^2 add on I got confused because the actually CD themselves are given that label. Just more proof NEC loved shooting themsleves in the foot.
How were they head to head of the Mega Drive was at 2.6 million shipped the same FY the PCE was over 5 million sold?
NEC's decisions made things closer but there was still over an a million hardware gap between the two when it was over with higher software sales on the NEC, and we don't really know what Sega actually sold from those shipments so the gap could have been even bigger.
I do agree with you that NEC didn't dominate Sega in Japan, a claim that has been mostly unchallenged for years, but I don't know if i would say it was close.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I don't know about the mindshare part, but it won everything else. We true Sega fans were never swayed. Sega was always way more cool than Nintendo, even as they were running their hardware business into the ground.
Romulus
Member
It's just common sense to me. If sega was confident in their Genesis sales, they would have stayed with the base system. They literally tried everything to stay competitive. "Retention" is a bad argument because there were barely any Genesis users to retain when the CD was in design. That was a move to spark excitement and stay competitive with any potential competitors. Sony and Nintendo were big companies and both of them working on a CD drive for the snes since 89 would not have stayed a secret. Sega was pretty stupid, but not stupid enough to take the snes lightly.
Last edited:
cireza
Member
To make it clear, I was being facetious on purpose here. I enjoyed all of these consoles
twerkouting
Banned
Sega kids party = smoking pall malls in a back alley while breaking bottles against the wall trying not to lose their latch key.
nkarafo
Member
No, both did really well, in some countries one or the other being a bit ahead.
The SNES sold more after 1994 though, with things like Donkey Kong Country, while Sega was busy trying to push the 32X and the Saturn, while still having the Sega CD. Nintendo only had the SNES with the N64 being very far away so they had more focus to it.
The SNES sold more after 1994 though, with things like Donkey Kong Country, while Sega was busy trying to push the 32X and the Saturn, while still having the Sega CD. Nintendo only had the SNES with the N64 being very far away so they had more focus to it.
PhaseJump
Banned
The ultimate takeaway from this thread's argument should be that both platforms had strengths and weaknesses. Sega had hardware from 1988 and took half the market as Nintendo delayed and released a frugal nightmare to develop games for. Nintendo made it's money in the early days by being a ruthless, cutthroat, chip supplier with predatory business contracts. If you built software for anybody else, they would try to crawl up your ass and put you out of business for stepping out of line.
If you're balls deep into the mainstream Nintendo history-revisionist narrative, that they did no wrong and were the greatest thing ever; you still owe it to yourself to play the Genesis library. It generally had more above average, good games worth checking out, and more variety.
If you wanted to list war comparisons, Nintendo would win with it's usual suspects. Sega would still figuratively have 2 great answers to the 1 SNES game that dominates, and in specific genres like Shmups, Sports, Beat em ups, or Arcade/Action games, Sega dominated without question.
If you're balls deep into the mainstream Nintendo history-revisionist narrative, that they did no wrong and were the greatest thing ever; you still owe it to yourself to play the Genesis library. It generally had more above average, good games worth checking out, and more variety.
If you wanted to list war comparisons, Nintendo would win with it's usual suspects. Sega would still figuratively have 2 great answers to the 1 SNES game that dominates, and in specific genres like Shmups, Sports, Beat em ups, or Arcade/Action games, Sega dominated without question.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
What I think some people don’t realize is how incredible it was for Genesis to take the fight to Nintendo the way they did.
The Sega Master System was a tremendous dud. Nobody bought the Master System, due to Nintendo threatening third party publishers if they dared to put their games on any other platform. There were big retailers that didn’t even bother selling the Master System at all.
So coming off the Master System and hitting it big years later with Genesis was pretty amazing. It was because of their success that third parties were able to break the Nintendo umbilical cord, and publish on a competing platform.
It would’ve been interesting to see an alternate history where Square and Enix went multi platform.
The Sega Master System was a tremendous dud. Nobody bought the Master System, due to Nintendo threatening third party publishers if they dared to put their games on any other platform. There were big retailers that didn’t even bother selling the Master System at all.
So coming off the Master System and hitting it big years later with Genesis was pretty amazing. It was because of their success that third parties were able to break the Nintendo umbilical cord, and publish on a competing platform.
It would’ve been interesting to see an alternate history where Square and Enix went multi platform.
Romulus
Member
I think the chips were mostly to do things that couldn't be done on either console at that time. We have all sorts of fan projects now that show otherwise, but stuff like Doom and SF Alpha would have struggled on both genesis/SNES without chips. Well, regular SF2 struggled on genesis with terrible colors and sound. And to be fair, in a time where vibrant colors were king, genesis lacked big time in that department. Stuff like DKC just looked on another level and getting superior ports of mainstream games just muddied the waters even more.
Really, the SVP would have been great to see more of compared to add on hardware.
Last edited:
xpresstuning
Member
Preferably on original hardware with an everdrive, or on a good PC emulator. Most official collections suck ASS and don't include the best of the library. I think those ports developed by M2 are great tho., but apart from M2, they're not good.
No idea how good the Mini's are, but i definitely have no reason to purchase that shit.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Sega stayed with the base system most of the time, in certain areas Sega CDs were nowhere to be found, after the initial excitement Sega clearly didn't bother trying to push mass adoptions, some regions didn't even GET the Sega CD, some that did it came out a year or two years later and was marketed as an option just to play some FMV and enhanced genesis titles. That looks like retention to me, keeping players on the platform with new stuff.
You trying to act like the Sega CD was a sign of lacking confidence is bizarre. Sega announced the CD in 89, it was planned before then, and then was delayed, if they NEEDED the Sega CD why did they take so long to get ready? Who were they worried about in 1989? It wasn't Nintendo, and NEC already had a CD drive out.
It's just completely illogical.
Delusional. Then they would have had it out with NEC, or at least two years earlier then they released it in 1992 and wouldn't have put in the delay. They also would have made sure that it was available on time with a marketing campaign in all relevant countries as a system seller and they didn't. There's also no reason why Sega would somehow know of some deal about a drive being worked on at Sony which wouldn't be shown for years in prototype form, and then just ignore NEC which already had a drive out.
Actually the master System, like Nintendo, brought a sizable amount of stock to retail, in 1986 but they only sold some of that stock and the rest sat on shelves, while the 7800 was selling out what they could make and the 2600 was a big mover too, and then would sell ahead of the Master system, a few months into the next year and hold that lead.
So Sega went to Tonka to help handle sales of the console.
So if anyone was impacted by the lack of locked out third parties it was Atari, while that had impact on Sega as well, there problem was people weren't really interested in the console. By the time things started to change NES had control and you could barely find a NES and Tonka was not a partner for their Genesis release as a result.
Also the Genesis success and challenge to Nintendo didn't happen until Sonic, Nintendo was already pushed to drop a lot of their practices before then, one could argue Sega had Atari to thank for removing the software and retail gridlock.
It was however incredible to See Sega go from that to having a lead people though wouldn't be possible. Sega had a game that created their success Sonic, and they were able to get some of the better third parties early on, and good mindshare for having the best version of MK1, everything just lined up until it didn't.
In before the Final Fight guys say SNES had the best beat em ups.
Well it was true, and Nintendo knew it and designed them weak on purpose so devs could use chips lol. Still good fun to be had on SNES.To make it clear, I was being facetious on purpose here. I enjoyed all of these consoles
I do find that Capcom wireframe chip nonsense to be pointless though, they only really pushed it for MMX2 and it didn't really do anything but show off.
Romulus
Member
Of course the Sega CD was nowhere to be found in some regions, it bombed, but Sega had no idea that would be the reception. I like how you use all caps to empathize the worst points. lol Nintendo was always the problem. lmao NEC. Nintendo is who spanked the living hell out of them before and was about to carry over their install base which is what happened.
The retention argument is just stupid. Let's just retain customers in specific regions lol. The CD drive wasn't going to retain anything, they hoped it would be a hit and match any potential advantage Nintendo etc might have. You're talking about when hardware should come out in exact timeframes to match competition hardware that didn't even make a mark, ignoring software development and timing for the launch etc etc etc. You're just posting to serve your agenda, which is to be right at this point. Nothing else. You come off as really upset and emotionally invested with name calling and all caps.
Last edited:
Syphon Filter
Member
SNES was light years ahead in quality games.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I must of misread your post.
I thought you said the opposite.
My mistake.
I was saying that SNES was better but it's far from light years better
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
It wasn't in regions before it bombed and you know this, the schtick i predictable.
Considering GET and NEEDED were the only all caps words, are you saying you're own argument (NEEDED) was a worst point? because I agree, Sega didn't NEED the Sega CD to compete, and you've already backtracked on that and are now saying they "thought" they needed it to compete which is stillw rong and nothing but you making random guesses with very poor evidence.
how can this happen if the PC Engine was NEC's only game console at that point and they were winning?
"Keeping customers on our platform, so they can help through wom increase hardware sales, and buy software and acessories making us money is stupid. Clearly we should just let our base fall apart and jump into a red hole" -Romulus
They were so scared of Nintendo and knew it was going to be a "hit" sooo much that Sega had nothing to show prototype wise until after the Super Famicoms release date in Japan was revealed, then delayed the add on by a year when the SNES came out in the US, and then DELAYED ANOTHER YEAR.
Clearly Sega CD was for the spooks of the Nintendo. How could Sega sleep at knight with their current number one status outside of Japan because of SNES, that's why they made sure not to heavily market it everywhere and delayed it 2 years in from the Super Famicom introduction, clearly the move of someone that NEEDED to get Sega CD out because they "NEEDED IT TO COMPETE" says this one guy. Even though those actions factually don't make any sense and don't match up with such a claim.
Projection.
Still no evidence, fell back on your original claim and changed it twice. Good show but you're argument doesn't work. Neither of the 3.
For something that was a "NEEDED" reactionary move Sega sure didn't really push the system that hard outside the US as an FMV machine with Sonic CD and some enhanced ports. Outside of their they didn't really push it that hard at all, and neither for Sonic CD. They didn't push either half as hard as Sonic 1 and Sonic 2, and those were just software, not a hardware and software.
I guess in your eyes Sega thought doing nothing and having a modestly marketed option was the way to beat Nintendo right? lol.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
Seriously just reread your reply here. Half it makes sense at best and i'm just speaking from a structure standpoint. Sega did assume they needed a CD add on to compete or else it would have never happened. It failed miserably like most every other hardware they made. They understood the demand wasn't there. Common sense.
None of what you're saying is backed up by evidence. You think NEC was some juggernaut threat with no previous install base. Lol. You're forgetting who spanked them previously. I like the angry confidence though mixed with bizzare senseless babble. Ignore list grows, you never made a single counter.
Last edited:
German Hops
GAF's Nicest Lunch Thief
You're not accounting for girth, though.
Last edited:
cartman414
Member
I'll admit Genesis had some better games, but not in the apples to apples sense you suggest. It did have the advantage in the genres you mention, but as for the "dominant" SNES games as you put it, there was no comparison, much less a 2 vs. 1 situation.
cartman414
Member
Funny thing was that it arguably started from an agreement made in bad faith on Sony's side. Nintendo didn't wise up to their game until it was too late.
https://kotaku.com/the-weird-history-of-the-super-nes-cd-rom-nintendos-mo-1828860861
Plus Sony had used the intended media for their ebook reader launched in 1990:
https://forums.nesdev.org/viewtopic.php?t=17156
rnlval
Member
FYI, Nintendo has SuperFX1 and SuperFX2 16-bit integer RISC CPU embedded solutions with certain SNES game cartridges i.e. this is like attaching a 68k CPU accelerator for the Amiga or X86 CPU overdrive upgrade for the PC.After reading yet another article saying how the SNES eventually won the 16-bit war, I was thinking about how it went down at the time. Here's the wiki summary-
Now, the SNES might've gotten a lead at one point, but I don't remember the market drastically shifting one way enough to be considered a real victory, as in forcing the Genesis to go under or die off at all. Sega cut the Genesis off before it was done to move onto the Saturn, even counting the 32X. I also don't consider the Saturn a response to the SNES, so it doesn't count (to me) that way either.
If the SNES pummeled the Genesis like the PlayStation did the Saturn, I'd consider it a true victory even though the Saturn also got yanked in favor of a successor. Even before the Saturn launched, development had already shifted towards it since publishers knew it was coming and at that point Genesis development began to dwindle. It's not like everyone abandoned the Genesis in favor of the SNES.
The only reason the SNES continued to do well into the 32-bit generation is because it was all that Nintendo was doing. Same deal as the NES until the SNES finally showed up late. If the 32X never happened, the Saturn and N64 swapped launch dates and Sega strongly pushed the Genesis the way Nintendo actually did the SNES, it likely would have also done well during the 32-bit generation until it was replaced late. Especially if Sega continued to experiment with accelerator chips like the SNES did. Hell, even if the 32X and Saturn still went the way they did, the Genesis still would've gone on strong if Sega fully backed it.
Anyways, what I'm asking on a neutral forum is did the SNES truly claim victory, or did Sega simply bow out to move on to bigger things?
SuperFX2 can deliver about 20 MIPS INT16 or 10 MIPS INT32 (with two INT16 operations). 10 MIPS INT32 is about 68030 @ 50Mhz level.
The Super FX chip was designed by Argonaut Games. The Super FX chip design team included engineers Ben Cheese, Rob Macaulay, and James Hakewill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Super_NES_enhancement_chips shows a list of enhancement chips that was bundled with SNES's game cartridges. The true narrative with SNES's performance is Nintendo shipped hardware upgrades with game cartridges e.g. SA1 is 10.74 Mhz evolved version from Super NES's built-in 5A22 CPU at 3.58Mhz
Last edited:
rnlval
Member
TurboGrafx-16 uses a Hudson Soft HuC6280 CPU, an 8-bit CPU modified with two 16-bit graphics processors.
The HuC6280 8-bit microprocessor is Japanese company Hudson Soft's improved version of the WDC 65C02 CPU, an upgraded CMOS version of the popular NMOS-based Commodore Semiconductor Group(CGS)/MOS Technology's 6502 8-bit CPU manufactured for Hudson by Seiko Epson and NEC.
Acorn Computers (UK) designed ARM v1 RISC CPU as a replacement for 6502/6512 CPUs since Commodore Semiconductor Group/MOS Technology's 65xx road map was inferior when compared to the competition. ARM v1 supports 65xx's little-endian binary format. CSG/WDC 65xx lived on as micro-controllers and was displaced by ARM and RISC-V.
PS; ARM supports big and little-endian formats. RISC-V supports the little-endian binary format.
SNES's Ricoh 5A22 CPU is based on WDC 65C816 which is a 16-bit evolution of the 65xx CPU family.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll