AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
This is objectively false. This is one of my top 10 8-bit games. This and Dragon's Trap are more fun for me than any NES game, bar SMB3.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
NES vs. Master System in terms of power
- Thread starter Phediuk
- Start date
This is objectively false. This is one of my top 10 8-bit games. This and Dragon's Trap are more fun for me than any NES game, bar SMB3.
I've seen Fatal Fury for the Game Gear, but I never knew there was a Master System version...
The Game Gear version looked and played really well, and it made impressive use of the Game Gear's colour palette:
The Master System version looks identical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv45iGIFSts
Here's the Game Gear version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPHUzlXUdec
Also, there seems to be a port of Virtua Fighter Animation for the Master System as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI88Rfz_64s Yet again, I thought this one was only available on the Game Gear.
There never was a Master System release of Fatal Fury Special, although you can force Game Gear games to play in full screen through emulation. However, someone is working on a romhack of the GG version to make it playable on SMS.
MrCunningham
Member
^ Oh, so yet again, it is another ROM hack. That would explain why I couldn't find any boxart for the game or why videos of it on Youtube look so buggy. The Game Gear version is still a brilliant port though.
This is an interesting version of the game that I am not too familiar with. Seems to be made by Sega of Japan and not Virgin games.
Somebody posted this video earlier in the thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWwgY2CVKTE
And the parallax in stage one looks really sweet, and the developers also added depth to the sides of the buildings to give them a 3D look.
This is an interesting version of the game that I am not too familiar with. Seems to be made by Sega of Japan and not Virgin games.
Somebody posted this video earlier in the thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWwgY2CVKTE
And the parallax in stage one looks really sweet, and the developers also added depth to the sides of the buildings to give them a 3D look.
zero shift
Banned
This is like asking "What's more powerful? The Wii or Dreamcast?" One system is leaps and bounds more powerful than the other in like every single way to the point that it's almost a full generation jump.
Ceallach
Smells like fresh rosebuds
One also came years after the other, so yes, good comparison.
petran79
Banned
Just wanted to add that in the nordic countries, or at least in Sweden, that really wasn't the case. The NES was the console to own here, probably since we got it earlier (Q3 1986) than most other European countries thanks to a local importer/distributor being interested early on because of them having imported Game & Watch to Scandinavia previously. I actually didn't even know about the SMS until the internet came around. But the Mega Drive was very popular here. It didn't completely dominate the SNES though, which was also very popular.
Sorry it just bugs me when I hear that all of Europe was Sega territory when that wasn't the case at all where I grew up so I just had to add that.
Sega dominated mostly in the arcades.
Nordic countries and Germany were more strict regarding entrance to arcades.
When I was 7-11 years old and lived in Germany, I only could visit arcades in fun fare parks. Entrance to kids was forbidden in arcades in cities.
In fun fare parks I got a glimpse of what Sega arcades really meant. Fortunately Amiga arcade ports were a nice alternative.
But in Greece kids could enter arcades, mostly without problems. There I watched Mortal Kombat and played Sega's arcades. This made buying an SMS or Megadrive redundant
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
It is like comparing DC to PS2, which are also 2 years apart. DC to Wii is an 8 year difference. DC to Wii has zero comparison, whatsoever.
DC to PS2 has a few comparison points, like DOA2 and Crazy Taxi. Between those two games the difference was minimal and even possibly slanted in the DCs favor in a couple aspects, but once you consider GTA: VC, MGS3, etc, it is clear the DC isn't anywhere close, much like NES to SMS. NES had games with special chips that bring it close or better than SMS, but that is pretty much the only way.
A Black Falcon
Member
No, the PS2 released only 15 months after the Dreamcast. That's quite a bit closer together than the gap between the NES and SMS, which was 26 months. But even so, yes, overall the PS2 is clearly more powerful, despite the DC having a few advantages.
That's reasonable, but based on timeframes, it's probably more like asking Dreamcast vs. Xbox or Gamecube. Results are the same, though.
Actually, because the NES has better audio than the SMS, it probably holds up better compared to the SMS than the DC does compared to the PS2, GC, or Xbox...
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
I disagree. While they coexisted, DC to PS2 wasn't a HUGE disparity graphically. DC to Xbox or GC isn't even close, though, even just with their respective launch titles. DC has nothing on Wreckless, Halo, Rallisport Challenge, Rogue Squadron, or Amped.
You're not confusing it with Monster Land, are you?
A Black Falcon
Member
Well, I wasn't just comparing DC to PS2 while they coexisted; I was comparing overall system power, as you eventually see much later in the PS2's life. Even in '01, though, how good would DC versions of PS2 games like GTA3 or MGS2 have been? It could probably have done GTA3, but it'd have needed cutbacks...
As for the GC and Xbox, yeah, as you say, no comparison right from day one. And the GC released 2 1/2 years after the DC, only a few months more than the gap between the NES and SMS (Japanese dates for all four systems, since they all released there first). Xbox was a few months after that.
zero shift
Banned
Well the Dreamcast had better visual quality than the Wii so you can use that as a balance.
The best of the best NES games don't touch an above average SMS games. Also while it was 8 years apart, the Wii was essentially overclocked 2000 hardware. Not to mention two years was a HUGE time in the 80s for hardware (unlike today). It more or less balances out.
EDIT -
Compare Castlevania III to Master of Darkness. Huge difference.
SeventhSon
Member
So a higher color palette and more on screen colors is an objective measure of SMS superiority over NES?
Those among other factors. The thread is about hardware capability.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Did you see the Gradius II example on the last page? The NES could compete and exceed when it had the right tools. You are right that the best 20 games graphically of the 8-bit generation (obviously not counting game gear, lynx, or tg16) are probably 90 percent SMS, but I am sure there has got to be 2 amazing NES games that would qualify,right?
zero shift
Banned
If it was a top 50 list maybe. The Master System was just a beast.
Yes, that's why SNES is cleary superior to Genesis.
MrCunningham
Member
At a glance, SMS games do look better because of this. The way it handles colour per layer instead of a limited palette per sprite does make a difference in overall in presentation. But from a technical standpoint, there are examples of NES games that do compare to the Master System.
Posted earlier in this thread, Crisis Force looks amazing on the NES: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cl2yizTrgQ&feature=youtu.be&t=2m46s
But then there are comparable things on the Master System like this fan made port of MUSHA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMnv-sx1AAg&feature=youtu.be
Both machines seems to have their up sides and down, despite one being newer hardware.
Nice. It looks like Turrican is hiding the glitches by making the left most tiles on the screen permanently blue.
SMS hide left screen too, for horizontal scrolling and sprite glitch. It's a hardware function in the NES et SMS.
Play first Alex kid level and look the left side screen when you fall in the water and the scrolling direction switch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgW9s14IJAM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m46s
Lack of sprite-flipping was a strange oversight and even weirder in the face of bg flipping instead (which is apparently how they achieved those first person dungeons in Phantasy Star). I'd imagine bg scaling was used to achieve the more "3d-like" games that they seemed obsessed with at the time.
One thing that was clear with Master System games; the frame-rate was often somewhat low. You had more games running at 30 fps or less on Master System than on NES where nearly everything 2D tried to match the refresh rate of 60 Hz. Even the Sonic games on Master System and Game Gear were a mess in this regard with near constant slowdown ultimately souring the experience.
I'm not sure the Master System's focus on duplicating "super scaler" style visuals was really a positive thing. They were impressive at the time but they've all aged very poorly thanks to obscenely low frame-rates and generally ugly scaling.
From what I understand the NES was pretty weak hardware on its own but many games worked around this with custom mappers and other chips built into the carts.
One thing that was clear with Master System games; the frame-rate was often somewhat low. You had more games running at 30 fps or less on Master System than on NES where nearly everything 2D tried to match the refresh rate of 60 Hz. Even the Sonic games on Master System and Game Gear were a mess in this regard with near constant slowdown ultimately souring the experience.
I'm not sure the Master System's focus on duplicating "super scaler" style visuals was really a positive thing. They were impressive at the time but they've all aged very poorly thanks to obscenely low frame-rates and generally ugly scaling.
From what I understand the NES was pretty weak hardware on its own but many games worked around this with custom mappers and other chips built into the carts.
Now we're getting into the interesting stuff finally.
I also watched the Game Sack episode on the Master System yesterday, and an interesting thing they said about Golden Axe is that it technically doesn't use sprites at all. All the characters are actually just background tiles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHbJLhumzUs
That episode also introduced me to a lot of interesting SMS games I had never even heard of. I actually owned a SMS back in the day with gems like Wonder Boy 3 but it seems I still missed out on a lot.
I also watched the Game Sack episode on the Master System yesterday, and an interesting thing they said about Golden Axe is that it technically doesn't use sprites at all. All the characters are actually just background tiles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHbJLhumzUs
That episode also introduced me to a lot of interesting SMS games I had never even heard of. I actually owned a SMS back in the day with gems like Wonder Boy 3 but it seems I still missed out on a lot.
Why would you do that?
Member
Two years may not seem like much, but it can be a lot.
The Dreamcast -> PS2 gap was not terribly huge, and neither was PS2 -> Xbox. However, N64 -> Dreamcast was night and day, as was Master System -> Turbografx.
I find it interesting, though, because systems that release so close to one another are really fun to compare. Even with systems that are seemingly night and day like N64 -> Dreamcast, you can find examples of N64 games looking closer to Dreamcast. For instance, Star Wars: Rogue Squadron in high res mode, outside of its terrible frame rate, shows the N64 is not as far off from the Dreamcast as it may have seemed. And in this thread are several games which proves the Master System can hold its own against the Turbografx.
nkarafo
Member
In the 8bit days, a small difference in quantity of colors was a big deal. 8bit computer gamers had this as top priority when they had to do comparisons, for instance.
Then, there are the other things like sprites, scrolling, etc. But colors was the most important for most people. It was the 480p / 720p / 1080p of that generation.
zero shift
Banned
Yes, N64 to Dreamcast is a much better comparison. Probably pretty close to the differences between the NES and SMS actually.
Yes, that's why SNES is cleary superior to Genesis.
This honestly tends to be true. Chances are if a system has better graphical prowess it has better processing prowess as well. The SNES was the exception because Nintendo decided to go with an outdated CPU as they planned to just use on-cartridge chips to make up the difference.
"Comparable"? MUSHA blows Crisis Force out of the water.
MrCunningham
Member
Well, I say comparable, because both of these examples showcase similar amounts of sprites on screen with a comparable level of slowdown on both sides. Both demos also feature comparable parallax scrolling tricks.
Though Crisis Force is using its own custom MMC that was developed by Konami, and the MUSHA demo might not get the same performance on real hardware. Machine translation from the description:
"Here, I have ported to Segamaku Ⅲ for the warrior arrester.
We are moving in the emulator on that Fusion not the actual equipment to say that.
Up test at high quality so-ish there is no capacity limit. (What 30 frames sorry)
I have summarized in Score Attack format. "
It seems like the video uploader is suggesting that the demo gets better performance on the Kega Fusion emulator than it would on real hardware.
It is still really impressive, regardless. It is shocking how close they managed to get it to look to the Genesis game.
It's just a classic memory mapper, equivalent of the common Nintendo MMC3 mapper (used in 500 NES games) even more basic. All SMS cartridge use (very basic) memory mappers too.
All the more impressive NES games don't use coprocessor or special sauce (like in some SNES cartridge), just memory mappers with fine CHR-ROM granularity (for Tileset switching, specific to the NES) and a IRQ scanline counter (because missing it in the PPU and it's very helpful).
For me the "secret sauce" of the NES (like in Crisis Force) is the Tileset switching (which requires a fine memory mapper but is just memory mapper).
No way, NES is way more competitive in that match up. Maybe NES:SMS
CE to PSX:N64
reamcast.AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
sörine;128057786 said:No way, NES is way more competitive in that match up. Maybe NES:SMS
Yeah. N64 to DC is like NES to PCE. Not comparable at all
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
I must be! I just looked at Monster World and I never owned that one (released in 1993 apparently? Way after US SMS' death.
That sucks to hear that it doesn't match up to WB in ML and WBIII. I might have to buy it off eBay to make my own conclusion. Shouldn't have any uissue on an American SMS, right?
MrCunningham
Member
Wikipedia lists the memory manager chip as VRC4, and it seems to be the only game to use it. It must be a derivative MMC clone with a different name attached to it.
There's still some impressive tricks going on in the game though.
Yea, but the Saturn's library kinda mauls the N64 lol. You have to basically strip the Saturn of every multiplat and Japanese-only release to make it close.
you remember the (very terrible) thread. it should go without saying but...
Haha yea. I had forgotten that thread. Good times, lol.
It should run just fine, yeah.
Monster World SMS is a down-port of a great MD game of the same name, and while the SMS version looks kinda nice for the hardware it plays terribly: the hitboxes and enemy movement are all jacked up, big chunks of the game are missing and it doesn't have battery save, just obnoxiously long passwords. I'd recommend grabbing the original and just pretending the SMS version doesn't exist.
Since the SMS was my very first console I also had it before I had really learned to read (much less read English), so the fact that the cartridges didn't have any images on them could make it a bit of a chore to select the right game. That was another practical advantage the NES had apart from the whole business with the pause button being on the console itself.