Fungi Forums

Miscellaneous => General Chat => Not at the Dinner Table => Topic started by: Glorb on January 17, 2010, 10:32:44 AM

Title: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Glorb on January 17, 2010, 10:32:44 AM
When I was a kid, I once saw my older brother come home with a broken nose. He had gotten into a fight over this very subject. He was seventeen at the time.

Let's see some noses get broken!
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Turtlekid1 on January 17, 2010, 11:04:15 AM
Super Nintendo.  Sega didn't stand a chance with that weird blue hedgehog.  Good thing they came up with Shadow later.

In all seriousness, though, the SNES had a lot of great games (SMW, Super Metroid, Chrono Trigger, Yoshi's Island, etc.).  I've just never really gotten into Sega.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 17, 2010, 12:18:31 PM
We've got some fierce competition here, folks! There's no telling which console shall emerge victorious.

I've never touched a Sega console; their lack of iconic, exclusive series limit their appeal.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 17, 2010, 12:20:38 PM
I was a Nintendo fanboy during those years, so I got used to saying Super Nintendo. I couldn't really back it up because a blue hedgehog really did sound cooler than Mario or Donkey Kong. One time I went to my aunt's house and they had a Sega Genesis, and of course the kids were playing Sonic the Hedgehog 2, so I watched it and it looked pretty cool. When it was my turn I played as Tails, but I was always left 20 screens behind by the more experienced player playing as Sonic. I remember thinking the only thing I liked about that game was Tails. I looked at the other Sega games they had lying around, but they all looked pretty lame in comparison to Sonic.

In retrospect I can say I'm glad I went with the Super Nintendo. Maybe I'm just not used to Sega's library, but there seems to be a serious lack of good games on that system. Aside from the Sonic series I also liked Ecco the Dolphin and Comix Zone, and I'm sure there were some ports, but that's about it. Oh yeah, and as a kid if I did go with Sega, I would have snatched up every peripheral they announced. Imagine me with a Sega CD and 32X all hooked up to the same console. Would have made the AVGN video more relatable anyway (but it still would have been as funny).

With Super Nintendo I got to experience games like SMW2: Yoshi's Island and Super Metroid and Uniracers and the Donkey Kong Country series. I was introduced to RPGs with Super Mario RPG. Super Smash Bros. on N64 made me aware to give EarthBound a try. Only through emulation years later did I experience many other great games like Chrono Trigger and Secret of Mana. And I also had one of those Super Game Boys which made playing Game Boys much more enjoyable (since I was getting tired of watching Mario on a small lime-yellow screen).

There's also the nostalgia factor of it having so many great games during one of those golden ages of 2D gaming and having the best controller I ever used. And according to Wikipedia the system was designed so that instead of becoming obsolete in a few years, games could use special chips put inside the cartridges to get an extra boost of whatever and stay ahead of the game, such as Super FX being put to use in titles like Star Fox and Yoshi's Island. Great move.

*looks up at Weegee's post, then the poll* Yeah. Though to be fair if I had sworn off Sega entirely, I would have never played Ecco the Dolphin which I called one of my favorite games of all time. Strangely, as soon as Sega got out of the console game and there was the announcement of Sega games on Nintendo consoles, I felt relief that the console wars were over, as if previously I had some desire to play Sega games but couldn't because it wouldn't be "right" to the side I belonged to. And now it was gone, I was free to experience what I had been missing all these years. So I snatched up Sonic Mega Collection and it was bliss, although most of the time I was only playing Sonic the Hedgehog 2 with it.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Glorb on January 17, 2010, 12:24:42 PM
What a bunch of fanboys.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: PaperLuigi on January 17, 2010, 01:59:28 PM
Glorb, you're not funny.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: TEM on January 17, 2010, 08:10:13 PM
I like the sound of the Genesis sound chip a lot more than SNES.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 17, 2010, 09:02:20 PM
Thing is, that's all the sounds Genesis could ever make. SNES could play whatever sounds you programmed. And SNES honestly sounds a lot better, although I do dig that Yamaha YM2612 sound.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: CrossEyed7 on January 17, 2010, 09:06:30 PM
SNES totally wins on sound, you guys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ODKKILZiYY)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 17, 2010, 09:11:54 PM
SNES totally wins on sound, you guys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO_70TBTTiY)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 17, 2010, 09:23:38 PM
Chup posted pretty much exactly what I was going to say regarding sound.

While it's true that the Genesis does have the problem of just not having any iconic games that you can't now play on other systems, so does the SNES, and it's completely irrelevant to whether or not it was better than the Super Nintendo back when they were current-gen anyway.

(It wasn't, though.)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: bobman37 on January 17, 2010, 10:00:41 PM
Sega Genesis was for all the cool kids.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: TEM on January 17, 2010, 10:12:29 PM
This delicousness was born from the limitation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgdZ76w00D4&annotation_id=annotation_450715&feature=iv

The only time SNES sounded cooler than a Genesis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXcMqVx8ibE&feature=related

And maybe this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKfLOMirwho&feature=related
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 17, 2010, 10:55:49 PM
There's a difference between sounding cooler and sounding better.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 17, 2010, 11:05:40 PM
I totally agree about Genesis sounding cool. I think it has some of the coolest sounds ever. But it still can only make those sounds. And you could never have something sound as good as the Chrono Trigger soundtrack on it.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Glorb on January 18, 2010, 04:22:18 PM
Genesis was just better guys, stop being fanboys.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: CrossEyed7 on January 18, 2010, 04:36:12 PM
No way, Kansas totally kicked their butts.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 18, 2010, 05:47:47 PM
I was always partial to Rush and Yes.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 18, 2010, 06:21:51 PM
Pink Floyd is still the master of prog rock, you cretinous neanderthals.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 18, 2010, 07:26:10 PM
The truth about Pink Floyd. (http://zzt.belsambar.net/ircman/index.php?func=display&m=&id=4107)

And the SNES is better than the Genesis, guys. Unless you seriously think that Sonic the Hedgehog is better than Super Mario World? That Thunder Force III is better than Gradius III? That Air Buster is better than Darius Twin? That Zero Wing is better than Phalanx? That Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine is better than Kirby's Avalanche? That Columns is better than Tetris Attack? That Streets of Rage is better than Final Fight? That Shining Force is better than Tactics Ogre? That Phantasy Star II and Phantasy Star IV are better than MOTHER 2 and Final Fantasy IV?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 18, 2010, 07:56:52 PM
That's where I was going with that "iconic series" comment. Aside from Sonic, Sega's consoles have been chronically deprived of longstanding, prolific, consistent, dependable franchises. NiGHTS and that game with the sombrero-wearing, maraca-playing monkeys don't count.

Also, I'm actually not particularly fond of Pink Floyd for the reason stated in that post. However, I'd put it more like this:

.................................................["Finally! The actual song is starting!"](song ends)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: coolkid on January 18, 2010, 08:31:45 PM
Are you sure this doesn't belong in Video Game Chat?

Genesis was just better guys, stop being fanboys.
Your custom title is so fitting right now.

Sega didn't stand a chance with that weird blue hedgehog.  Good thing they came up with Shadow later.

This makes my face hurt.

Oh, and SNES all the way. Nice sound chip and totally not rediculous game library, Genesis guys!
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Toad on January 18, 2010, 10:09:45 PM
That Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine is better than Kirby's Avalanche?

Can I take this time to point out that this is exactly the same game on two seperate systems, with different sets of characters plugged in?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 18, 2010, 10:41:38 PM
I preferred Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine in that regard because of better level music. I never got past level one, but come on, Kirby can't compare to this music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW-_EkTLYWg).

As for Tetris Attack which is just Panel de Pon with Yoshi characters... I was a little suspicious at first about how happy it was (look at the colorful intro), though I realize now that's because the original game looked like that. I'd much rather play as characters from the Yoshi universe than random anime girls. But it's a good thing the awesome music was left as-is. I tend to remember Tetris Attack more for its music than gameplay.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 18, 2010, 10:42:42 PM
Toad, I fully expected someone to point that out, which is why I used the Puyo Puyo example in the first place. And even though they're identical in terms of gameplay (both using the ruleset from the original Puyo Puyo), I'd still say Kirby's Avalanche is the superior conversion, if only because it's more of a Kirby game than Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine is a Sonic game. (penguinwizard, Kirby's Avalanche uses remixes of themes from other Kirby games, while Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine uses remixes of actual Puyo Puyo music.)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 19, 2010, 12:39:54 AM
Well, Puyo Puyo's music sounds pretty good then.

And I suspect this thread was in the Dinner Table forum because of the potential for getting into a shouting match over which is better. Which surprisingly doesn't seem to have happened.

And that Pink Floyd comment/reply is right on. I didn't even know half their songs had a melody because I have to wade through several minutes of atmosphere and UFO sounds first. While I kind of like the band, I just get tired quickly of how unconventional the music is compared to everything else. Atmospheric music usually isn't memorable for me because it's so in the background you don't realize it's there. The two Pink Floyd songs I like are "Breathe" (even though its really short and I can't be bothered to think about what the lyrics mean) and "Great Gig In The Sky" (the wailing, man, it's timeless. I'd love to hear people's reactions when they first heard that song, since I don't quite know how to react to a song with mournful screaming).
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 19, 2010, 12:48:13 AM
So basically you've half-listened to Dark Side of the Moon once?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 19, 2010, 12:53:02 AM
This thread shouldn't be Not at the Dinner Table, er...I mean, it should be at the Dinner Table because this is The Mushroom Kingdom. I'm actually befuddled how Genesis has three votes!
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: waddle_doo on January 21, 2010, 05:11:47 PM
SNES all the way.

Nintendo has always focused on making family games, as for Sega, they have made games JUST for the money.

Where has it got them?

It got Nintendo to be the BIGGEST gaming company currently going.

It got Sega...nothing, seriously, they don't even make gaming systems anymore.

So, SNES is definitely the best.

What does Sega have anymore? Sonic. what does Nintendo have? Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Starfox, Metroid and Donkey Kong.

See the difference?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Glorb on January 21, 2010, 05:14:28 PM
Worst post ever. Seriously, just never post again on any forum ever.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 21, 2010, 05:30:14 PM
Don't be so hard on yourself, Glorb.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Turtlekid1 on January 21, 2010, 05:37:51 PM
SNES all the way.
Sure.

Nintendo has always focused on making family games, as for Sega, they have made games JUST for the money.

Where has it got them?
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Nintendo isn't only motivated by money.  I don't think I need to remind anyone else here that a lot of long-time Nintendo customers feel rather betrayed of late because of Nintendo's tendency to go for the easy sell.

It got Nintendo to be the BIGGEST gaming company currently going.

It got Sega...nothing, seriously, they don't even make gaming systems anymore.

So, SNES is definitely the best.
As I understand it, Sega suffered because they struggled to find a strong competitor to match Nintendo's Mario.  When they did find a winning formula, they deviated so much from that formula with each progressive installment that they dug themselves into a hole.

What does Sega have anymore? Sonic. what does Nintendo have? Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Starfox, Metroid and Donkey Kong.

See the difference?
The number of frachises a company has to its name has nothing to do with how well that company does.  Remember, for a while, Sonic was the popular one of that bunch.  I will concede the point that Sonic now sucks, if you were implying that.  There's no denying that Nintendo has a lot of good franchises, but quantity != quality.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: superstarMASIAH on January 26, 2010, 12:19:26 PM
Why choose when you have both?  HAHAHAhahahahahAHAHAAHAH!
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 26, 2010, 12:31:41 PM
Because so many SNES games are better than so many Genesis games that even if I had the five objectively best games for each system (whatever those games may be) I'd almost certainly still choose the SNES.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: TEM on January 26, 2010, 12:40:07 PM
Why choose when you have both?  HAHAHAhahahahahAHAHAAHAH!
Once again the only way to really choose which one is better is to own both and do a personal comparison.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 26, 2010, 12:52:04 PM
Some of us weren't rich enough to afford two consoles at once. Or some of us didn't care to have both. Or maybe we just weren't sure whether they could be hooked up to the same TV at the same time (if the AVGN can hook up what looks like 20+ consoles to one TV, then anybody can).
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Toad on January 26, 2010, 12:55:59 PM
Some of us weren't rich enough to afford two consoles at once. Or some of us didn't care to have both.

Some of us still aren't rich enough for multiple consoles, and I honestly didn't care for Sega way back when. I don't know, something about the way they marketed Sonic didn't rub me the right way ("Mario's an old man and moves slowly!" Anybody remember that..?)
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 26, 2010, 02:54:42 PM
Mario might be old(ish) and move slowly, but Sonic's dead (http://www.cubetoons.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:level-89).

But hey, you had to have mudslinging. And I liked that Nintendo Power pointed out that Blast Processing was just a marketing term. Then whoever did the SNES game "Claymates" put some blast processing of their own into it, making Oozy the rat run so fast the stage almost becomes a blur.

I did see the Sega commercial online where it says "Sega Does What Nintendon't". And they show Super Mario Kart in there as an example of a slow game on Nintendo. Um, I've played Super Mario Kart, and those karts go pretty darn fast (not to mention the crazy skidding they do around corners). They probably showed the game at 50cc or just as a race begun.

...and where the heck is the Super Mario RPG American commercial...
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: superstarMASIAH on January 26, 2010, 04:04:51 PM
I liked Earthworm Jim, and I had Ren and Stimpy for sega that was good too.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 26, 2010, 07:54:56 PM
There's an Accomplishment in Dissidia called "Battlegenesis Does". I smiled.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 26, 2010, 08:55:59 PM
Yeah, I was amazed at some of the references Dissidia threw at me.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Mr. Wiggles on January 26, 2010, 09:03:48 PM
As I understand it, Sega suffered because they struggled to find a strong competitor to match Nintendo's Mario.  When they did find a winning formula, they deviated so much from that formula with each progressive installment that they dug themselves into a hole.

No, Sonic's name being driven through the ground has absolutely nothing to do with Sega withdrawing from the hardware market. What killed them was creative differences among the different branches of the company. Seems Sega Japan and Sega of America had polar opposite markets and mindsets which made working together all but impossible.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 26, 2010, 09:05:58 PM
What killed them was PS2 marketing. If that hadn't killed them, the fact that you could create your own Dreamcast discs just by straight burning CDs would have.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on January 26, 2010, 09:16:44 PM
PS2 marketing plus EA Sports screwing them over.

You could create your own PC discs just by straight burning CDs, too.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 26, 2010, 09:25:55 PM
Only for a brief window of time. I suppose there was floppy-copying before that, though.

Regardless, the PC isn't a dedicated game machine. Nor is there only one company manufacturing them. PC would live on even with 100% game piracy (which it probably nearly has lol).
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 26, 2010, 09:34:08 PM
Speaking of the Blue Blur's dwindling credibility as a gaming icon, Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing is set to come out next month. Eughh.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 26, 2010, 11:28:03 PM
Why specifically are you eughhing? Do you know it's bad?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Toad on January 27, 2010, 12:31:58 AM
Can I borrow your time machine?

I don't think either system was any less fun than the other, but I seem to recall having more fun with the Snes games than the Sega. Maybe 'cuz most of the kids I knew back then had Snes's..
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: TEM on January 27, 2010, 09:08:59 AM
Why a time machine? They still exist. Why force an opinion if you're too poor to make an informed decision? Why is everyone so retarded?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: nensondubois on January 27, 2010, 09:53:10 AM
In contrast, the Genesis had some great games like Virtual Pinball, Toejam and Earl and Sonic 3 but it didn't have as many good games as the SNES did like Star Fox, Super Metroid and Dirt Trax FX, and Yoshi's Island to name a few.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Chupperson Weird on January 27, 2010, 05:23:36 PM
TEM, I think the time machine comment was referring to the guy who has apparently already played Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 27, 2010, 07:13:06 PM
I was eughhing over Sega cashing in on another gimmick by stuffing Sonic and co. into a one-off kart racer.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 27, 2010, 08:59:20 PM
And here I thought "eughhing" was an Ahh-nold impersonation.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 28, 2010, 12:39:04 AM
How is making a kart racer a "gimmick". It's a basic genre.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: ShadowBrain on January 28, 2010, 07:55:03 AM
The act of producing a kart-racing game can be considered a gimmick in and of itself.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 28, 2010, 08:49:03 PM
It cannot. I think overuse of the term "gimmick" has made you people forget what it means. A gimmick is an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, esp. one designed to attract attention or increase appeal. Gimmicks are a good thing. Gimmicks are innovation and creativity. Somewhere along the line the word got hijacked to mean, "an innovation I don't like for some reason".

When Nintendo made Mario Kart, that was a gimmick. And a good one. Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing is not a gimmick; it's a straight entry in a well-established genre.

The fact that Banjo and Kazooie are in it is a gimmick.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: bobman37 on January 28, 2010, 10:43:15 PM
Lizard Dude just ate you for lunch.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 28, 2010, 11:44:50 PM
A gimmick is an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, esp. one designed to attract attention or increase appeal.

Really? Let's just see what the dictionary has to say about that!

...Alright, never mind. Dictionaries aren't very reliable anyway, so let's check what Wikipedia, the infallible wellspring of knowledge, defines the term as:
Quote from: Wikipedia
a gimmick is a quirky feature that distinguishes a product or service without adding any obvious function or value. Thus, a gimmick sells solely on the basis of distinctiveness and may not appeal to the more savvy or shrewd customer.

SUCK IT

...But seriously, in this context, "innovation" and "gimmick" don't overlap. In gaming, gimmicks are employed in place of valuable creative elements. Why put thought into an inventive new game when one can just stuff popular characters into a cookie-cutter formula and watch fans clamour over it, right?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Lizard Dude on January 29, 2010, 12:12:43 AM
What do you think the last inventive new game Sega put thought into was?
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: ShadowBrain on January 30, 2010, 09:17:06 PM
Well, I'm drawing a blank... but the same can be said for many other developers as well.

It cannot. I think overuse of the term "gimmick" has made you people forget what it means. A gimmick is an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, esp. one designed to attract attention or increase appeal. Gimmicks are a good thing. Gimmicks are innovation and creativity. Somewhere along the line the word got hijacked to mean, "an innovation I don't like for some reason".
In an almost tangible ironic twist, that is actually how I have been interpreting the term for some time, and this was the rare occasion where I was a little looser with my use of it.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Glorb on January 31, 2010, 01:04:02 PM
(post)

Please tell me that abandoning a legitimate source of info for Wikipedia = sarcasm.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: penguinwizard on January 31, 2010, 01:29:10 PM
Reminds me of that one Penny Arcade comic where the guy said the difference between "homage" and "rip-off" was whether he liked it. Similarly this seems to be the difference between "gimmick" and "innovation".

Merriam-Webster online says:
1 a : a mechanical device for secretly and dishonestly controlling gambling apparatus
1 b : an ingenious or novel mechanical device : gadget
2 a : an important feature that is not immediately apparent : catch
2 b : an ingenious and usually new scheme or angle
2 c : a trick or device used to attract business or attention <a marketing gimmick>

So I guess we're looking at 2b and 2c.

Now can we get back to the important issue here: Mario would totally whoop Sonic in a Smash Bros. Brawl match.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Turtlekid1 on January 31, 2010, 02:04:39 PM
Assuming the absence of Smash Balls, anyway...
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Weegee on January 31, 2010, 02:32:24 PM
Please tell me that abandoning a legitimate source of info for Wikipedia = sarcasm.

I'm sorry, but how could you possibly not smell the liberal dollop of sarcasm smothering that post from a mile away?!
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Jman on March 06, 2010, 10:03:01 PM
I swear, these are the only kind of debates I'm good at.  I liked both Mario and Sonic, even when they were such bitter enemies back then.  I can only say Nintendo due to the fact that the SNES was the system I wound up getting (in '98, when the war was long over).  However, I would probably buy a Genesis now if I could find one.  Nintendo wins out due to personal experience.
Title: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: shoyu12 on April 11, 2010, 07:03:57 PM
I personally think super nintendo is better. Just for the fact that it had better exclusives such as mario and zelda and that I grew up playing it. I find the Sega was good but overrated.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: superstarMASIAH on April 12, 2010, 08:16:29 AM
I would probably buy a Genesis now if I could find one. 
Thats funny.  I have about 3 of them and I can't seem to remember how I've aquired them.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: WarpRattler on April 12, 2010, 09:38:26 AM
Yeah, I find it funny when people say they have trouble finding older systems like the Genesis or the NES when I had more difficulty finding something newer like a Dreamcast than I ever did finding any of the older stuff. These people need to be looking at thrift stores and such.
Title: Re: Super Nintendo vs. Sega
Post by: Jman on April 14, 2010, 02:52:42 PM
Yeah, I find it funny when people say they have trouble finding older systems like the Genesis or the NES when I had more difficulty finding something newer like a Dreamcast than I ever did finding any of the older stuff. These people need to be looking at thrift stores and such.

I look at stores like that all the time.  The only problem is I'm usually strapped for cash when I find one.