Ha ha ha, that's just ridiculous. Everybody knows the SNES is more powerful than the MD and PCE graphically. 
I can't believe that ancient fanboy wars still remains to some people. 
SNES is the only one of these systems that can compare to the Saturn and other 32 bit systems.
Although I think that the DKC games are impressive on a technical level, I don't really like the art and it wouldn't be much work for a decent programmer to port them to the Genesis looking very similar. They'd probably end up looking like the GBA version, but in a higher resolition. Hell, even the b&w Gameboy ports look strikingly similar.
The SNES has it's strengths and weakness'. I don't think it's as useless as SNES-haters make it out to be for handling sprites, speed, bg's etc(
since there're lots of games for it that do everything). But it's bottlenecks limit the graphics it can pump out just like anything else and it's not 'more powerful' or the 'only 32-bit looking' system.
Good PCE games often have more vibrant colors than the better SNES games, whether it's a benefit of working from a smaller pallette or per-sprite color restrictions on the SNES, or whatever. And most high color count SNES games are just riding the boost from a high color bg layer. Which is why they don't look frighteningly better.
Saying that any one of the three 16-bit consoles is far and away superior graphically is
true fanboyism.
Even if this is one of the odd posts where you're being sarcastic to get people going, unfortunately a lot net snerds think this way.
How come everybody's comparing ports all the time? They're ports! Ignore them and focus on the original titles.
Original titles are great for showing how good a system is on it's own or in general. But you can't really directly judge a console against others using apples and oranges as well as with ports, which is using apples and apples.
Unfortunately, not every game is developed as well as it can be, so unless the same developer who's good at working on both consoles uses everything in their power to make uber ports for each system, it's not a perfect way to compare either.
But regardless of potential, in the end we already have a pretty much finite set of games for each console. So if you're mainly interested in stuff the PC Engine is missing, then you're better off with another system.
And when it comes to ports, the PC Engine isn't always the best. But if you're into Neo Geo fighters, then the PC Engine versions really are a step above the SNES & Genesis versions. Unless you want Samurai Showdown, then find it one of the other systems.
I think that once a system has a decent number of quality titles as the Genesis, SNES and PC Engine all do, its fair to say they're all great and to answer the author's questions: PC Engine/Turbografx-16 games compare very well to the other 16-bit consoles.
I agree with Seldane that the SNES isn't a piece of garbage and it does have lots of great ands great looking games though.
Mario sucks. Everybody knows that. That's why it's such a massive flop worldwide.
Although I think that most real Mario games are great, mass appeal/success isn't a good indicator of quality.
Otherwise, all the blockbuster movies and pop sensation recording 'artists' would be the renaissance of of our time. But even most people who eat all that crap up admit it's not high brow pinky raising art.
And we all know that regardless of quality, nothing sells better than licensed games. Because the average buyer isn't looking for quality.
