Author Topic: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate  (Read 13846 times)

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #285 on: September 27, 2007, 03:30:54 PM »
I think it's because the screens are stopped at those points.
i think so too my friend :D anyway nice catch^^
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

sunteam_paul

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4732
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #286 on: September 27, 2007, 08:40:27 PM »
I think it's because the screens are stopped at those points.

This is true :P
The PC Engine Software Bible
Quote from: Tatsujin
I just felt in a hole!

OldTurboBastard

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 99
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #287 on: September 28, 2007, 02:54:45 AM »
Here's another interesting comparison

That's the single greatest screenshot comparison i've ever seen...nice
"I saw this wino, he was eating grapes. I was like, "Dude, you have to wait." - hedberg

Turbo D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3989
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #288 on: September 28, 2007, 11:01:52 PM »
ya, its a great comparison  :wink:

esteban

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24063
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #289 on: September 30, 2007, 03:27:23 AM »
I agree with what everyone has said thus far: these differences are pretty interesting, if not mind-boggling. The changes hardly seem worthwhile, but, as Keranu noted, some aspects of the CD version aren't better.

Crazy.
  |    | 

esteban

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24063
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #290 on: September 30, 2007, 03:41:44 AM »
Put me in with Chris and Joe on this issue: I wasn't playing the Genesis for the sports games. I don't think all of the western-developed games for Genesis were bad, but many of them had a lot to be desired. That said, you have to admit that Genesis got a bunch of neat ports  (Star Control, King's Bounty, etc.) that make it a lot easier to dismiss the crappy stuff.

What first attracted me to the TurboGrafx-16 as a Genesis owner, was the 'original'/console games like Neutopia and Dungeon Explorer. I've always loved arcade games and it was cool to have faithful home ports of some, but I wanted some great SMS/NES games with next gen aesthetics. I liked stuff like Revenge of Shinobi, PSII, Sword of Vermillion and Last Battle more than GnG, Golden Axe and Strider.

I had a passing interest in the TG-16 from what little I'd seen of it, I really liked some of the colorful grafx. One day an aquantence of mine (real game nerd) invited me over to see his new TG-16 in action. He was playing Neutopia and Dungeon Explorer mainly that night. I didn't pay DE much attention, since it looked like a Gauntlet rip-off and I hated Gauntlet. Neutopia looked cool, but again I kinda brushed it off probably from console-bias of being a Genesis player.

But in the weeks that followed I started thinking about those games and couldn't get them out of mind. I quickly realized that they were exactly what I wanted (long questy 16-bit games). I got a TG-16 that X-Mas/Birthday and not long afterwards I found an ad in the newspaper in which that guy was selling both Neutopia and Dungeon Explorer.

Although I'd ocassionally sell and later buy new Genesis & SNES systems over the years, the TG-16/PCE is the one console I've always hung onto from that time onward.
Hahahhahahaha. Awesome. I hear you about the draw of original console titles. I hung on to the TG-16 as well, even though I really liked Genesis and SNES (and NES) as well.

Come to think of it, I am going to be so bold (and wacky) as to proclaim that the early 90's was the TRUE GOLDEN ERA of home consoles, at least for me. NES was still viable and great games were being released. TG-16 and Genny were new... then the SNES appeared. As far as I was concerned, there were FOUR VIABLE CONSOLES "co-existing" at the same time. Great games released for each system in the same span of a few years. If you add in the novelty of CD-ROM games (TG-CD, SegaCD), other eras just can't compare.

:) I'm having fun.

  |    | 

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #291 on: September 30, 2007, 05:48:22 AM »
I agree with what everyone has said thus far: these differences are pretty interesting, if not mind-boggling. The changes hardly seem worthwhile, but, as Keranu noted, some aspects of the CD version aren't better.

Crazy.

if the HuCard version had the voices (which shouldn't have been a big issue) plus a better gameplay (like the MD had), the game would be a decade better than what we got.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2007, 01:31:19 PM by Tatsujin »
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

mikeexpert233

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #292 on: January 07, 2009, 09:36:15 PM »
reality is most here are kids and are not from the 16 bit generation or are just uneducated to the facts  the fact is the turbografx is more powerful than snes or sega back in the 80s not many understood the technical aspects of game consoles so they just judged power based on bits today we know ram clock speed etc are more important mips stands for machine instructions per second the turbo has higher mips than the genesis all of you speaking on resolution are painfully wrong the fact is that the turbografx 16 could get resolutions of 512- thats more than snes sega neogeo ps1 even n64 and dont say it wasnt used infact both sherlock holmes games on the turbo used it the turbos 8 bit cpu was faster than segas 16 and yes paralex scrolling was possible on the turbo just more taxing infact games like gates of thunder used more paralex than sega did what gamres released on both systems look better on the sega i ask you? only 1 golden axe and it was ported by a third party streetfighter 2 the most powerful game at the time is rated better on turbo than snes or sega more colorful sharper clearer sound cadash on turbo 4 players on sega 2 on turbo better graphics shinobi the sega game actually is rated higher on pc engine all the valis games exile etc almost all games released on all 3 systems are better looking and sounding on turbo and lets not forget its the oldest of the 3 colors mattered most in the 2d era like neogeo turbo could put up big colors the sega coundnt plus turbos 2 16 bit graphics chips could go beyond the sega or snes in mips as i stated thats why dracula x couldnt be made on sega cd  turbo shooters on sega cd have slowdown too

WoodyXP

  • Guest
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #293 on: January 08, 2009, 12:23:33 AM »
I have a headache.

guyjin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #294 on: January 08, 2009, 01:16:38 AM »
reality is most here are kids and are not from the 16 bit generation or are just uneducated to the facts  the fact is the turbografx is more powerful than snes or sega back in the 80s not many understood the technical aspects of game consoles so they just judged power based on bits today we know ram clock speed etc are more important mips stands for machine instructions per second the turbo has higher mips than the genesis all of you speaking on resolution are painfully wrong the fact is that the turbografx 16 could get resolutions of 512- thats more than snes sega neogeo ps1 even n64 and dont say it wasnt used infact both sherlock holmes games on the turbo used it the turbos 8 bit cpu was faster than segas 16 and yes paralex scrolling was possible on the turbo just more taxing infact games like gates of thunder used more paralex than sega did what gamres released on both systems look better on the sega i ask you? only 1 golden axe and it was ported by a third party streetfighter 2 the most powerful game at the time is rated better on turbo than snes or sega more colorful sharper clearer sound cadash on turbo 4 players on sega 2 on turbo better graphics shinobi the sega game actually is rated higher on pc engine all the valis games exile etc almost all games released on all 3 systems are better looking and sounding on turbo and lets not forget its the oldest of the 3 colors mattered most in the 2d era like neogeo turbo could put up big colors the sega coundnt plus turbos 2 16 bit graphics chips could go beyond the sega or snes in mips as i stated thats why dracula x couldnt be made on sega cd  turbo shooters on sega cd have slowdown too

whoever taught you english should be fired.
"Fun is a strong word." - SNK
"Today, people do all kind of shit." - Tatsujin

Nintega

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #295 on: January 08, 2009, 01:29:55 AM »
I don't think Turbo would have handled a game like Gunstar Heroes or Alien Soldier even with that Arcade Card Duo.

ceti alpha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3836
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #296 on: January 08, 2009, 01:49:03 AM »
I don't think Turbo would have handled a game like Gunstar Heroes or Alien Soldier even with that Arcade Card Duo.

Both those games look cool, but I don't see where the PC Engine would be unable to replicate, if not improve on.


"Let the CAW and Mystery of a Journey Unlike Any Other Begin"

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #297 on: January 08, 2009, 02:21:35 AM »
I don't think Turbo would have handled a game like Gunstar Heroes or Alien Soldier even with that Arcade Card Duo.

but neither the md would have handled a game like sapphire ;)

and colorwise it smokes both games on just one 8-bit databus with ease :P
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Joe Redifer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #298 on: January 08, 2009, 03:20:00 AM »
If anyone thinks the Turbo could replicate, say, Gunstar Heroes without any loss whatsoever then they are fooling themselves.  That being said, anyone who thinks the Genesis could replicate , say, Air Zonk exactly would also be a fool.

The MD couldn't handle Sapphire, but the Sega CD could (with the requisite color loss, of course).  I'd like to see the Arcade Card handle Batman Returns or Soul Star.  Or Super Castlevania IV.  Can't be done, not even close.  But really, who cares?
« Last Edit: January 08, 2009, 03:22:27 AM by Joe Redifer »

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #299 on: January 08, 2009, 03:24:00 AM »
what the MD never would have been able to replicate exactly was a simple R-Type. the palette just wouldn't have been sufficient. and that was an almost release titel on the pce.
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^