so in all honesty how does the pcengine compare?

[muse hunter]

hi, i'm new to these forums, i've never had a pcengine before and its probably because of this that the system arouses my curiousity.  I'll probably get one within the next couple of months, probably start with a basic hu card system.  But my question is this, how does the pcengine compare to its rivals at the time? the md, snes, and neogeo, i know asking a pcengine fansite isn't probably the best way to find an unbiased view vut i'm sure there are many here who can give a balanced view. 

So how does it compare? power, games, etc

[GUTS]

Graphics-wise the Neo blows all of them away easily, it goes Neo Geo>PC Engine/Genesis>SNES.

If you include the PC Engine Duo then game-wise the PC Engine is probably tied with the Genesis, ahead of the snes, and WAY ahead of the Neo Geo (which has some awesome games, but not much variety).

There are a few snes loving jokers on here who can't live without mode 7 and will rank the SNES the highest, but most rational people agree with my assessment.

[PCEngineHell]

Graphics-wise the Neo blows all of them away easily, it goes Neo Geo>PC Engine/Genesis>SNES.

If you include the PC Engine Duo then game-wise the PC Engine is probably tied with the Genesis, ahead of the snes, and WAY ahead of the Neo Geo (which has some awesome games, but not much variety).

There are a few snes loving jokers on here who can't live without mode 7 and will rank the SNES the highest, but most rational people agree with my assessment.

Damn straight,Mode 7 was over rated ass as far as scaling is concerned. It was like effectively used in a few Konami games and the early stuff like Super Mario World,Actraiser and Pilot Wings,after that it became as useless as blast processing,some games only using Mode 7 for the damn title screen,just silly.

Yea Id say graphically NeoGeo first,Turbografx/Pc Engine second,but as far as Snes and Genesis goes,thats a hard one because Ive seen both systems produce groundbreaking 2D graphics here and there,but yea over all,esp if you get a Duo,and you do a majority of importing youll see the Pc-Engine is tops over genesis and Snes in quality graphics.

[nat]

I will agree with GUTS for the most part...

I don't know anything about the Neo Geo, so I've left it out of the following.

Graphically, the SNES has a larger color palette than the PC Engine/TurboGrafx and the Genesis. In fact, the Genesis has a very small color palette, around 61 colors on screen at a time. Because of this, I feel MOST Genesis games have not aged as well as their TurboGrafx and SNES counterparts. Games tended to have a "darker", less colorful and washed out look on the Genesis. The PC Engine/TG has a color palette somewhere in the 500 range, while the SNES is up there in the thousands. Rated this way, the SNES would probably be the top dog followed by the PCE/TG and then the Genesis.

HOWEVER, the SNES is slow as shit. The PCE/TG is quite a lot faster, as is the Genesis. When you factor these things together, the PCE/TG kind of gives you the best of both worlds (graphically) with colorful graphics, and fast processing. The Genesis is fast, but the graphics have a tendency to be more drab and unappealing to look at.

Here's a good example: I decided to whip out an old copy of Wonderboy III: Monster Lair for the Genesis the other day and give it a spin. I own the same game for my TurboGrafx. I had to shut off the Genesis version after only a couple levels. The game just looks so bad on the Genesis. The TG version has aged so much better and still looks good, today. I find this to be the case with many games released for both systems, but that's not to say there aren't some Genesis games that look really good. The Sonic games manage to look pretty bright and colorful, for example. But games on the PCE/TG are KNOWN for their bright, colorful look.

If you want to rate on available game library... SNES has the most, followed by the PCE and then the Genesis. Quality of games? I would rate the PCE at the top, but I am biased. That's why I own a TurboGrafx. I feel the quality game to crap game ratio is better for the PCE/TG library than the other two. Owners of other systems may disagree: it's mostly a matter of personal taste. The PCE/TG library has some KILLER ports of arcade games that are hands-down better than their respective ports on the SNES and Genesis.

For me, it all comes down to the games. Technical specs aside, you should choose whether or not you want to buy a system based on the games you want to be able to play. Personally, from the 16-bit genre, I own both an SNES and a TurboGrafx. This means I have access to the two biggest game libraries from that era. My PCE/TG library is larger by a ratio of 10:1 over my SNES library. I also play my Turbo at least 4 out of 7 days of the week. I will play the SNES maybe 4 times a month. I own several versions of the same game for each system, and I usually tend towards my Turbo over the SNES most of the time. SF2: CE on the Turbo vs. SF2 Turbo on the SNES. I'll play the Turbo version 9 times out of 10 because I can use my TurboStick and because I like the Turbo synth music better than the SNES music. Graphically the games are virtually identical, but I suck at the game with the SNES controller.

I also now own some really badass SNK ports for the Turbo that were not nearly as good on the SNES or Genesis (World Heroes 2, the Fatal Fury games, etc). The thing about arcade ports on the PCE is that there are a lot of them, and they are usually very good.

[rolins]

I never really cared about which system was more powerful. It really is all about which system had the games you wanted to play.

Me, I'm crazy about shmups and healthy dose of action games, so I'm always rooting for the PC-Engine and Genesis.

The Snes was also fun to play though I won't lie. Their lineup is varied between platform and adventure games but more gear toward RPG fanatics. RPGs aren't my cup of tea, I just don't have the attention span for them. The only games I loved playing were Super Contra, Super Metroid, Axelay, and Super Aleste.

[grahf]

Graphically, i would vote:
1] NeoGeo
2] Snes
3] PC Engine
4] Genesis

Gameplay/fun wise:
1] SNES/PC Engine tie
2] NeoGeo
3] Genesis

[guyjin]

[stands up]

"My name is Guyjin and I'm a snerd."

Graphics wise, none of the 16 bit systems can touch the Neogeo. but that's why people paid out the wazoo for it.
as for the remaining 3, the NES can put out a lot of colorful sprites, and is usually better than the Turbo and Genesis, even without mode 7. However, its slow processor often causes problems with fast paced games; Street fighter 2 is a prime example of this. it's probably the worst of the 3 16 bit console versions. (and I only say 'probably' because I haven't played the PCE version; the Genny version is definitely better.)

if I had to rank them in order:
1:Neogeo
2:SNES (but only barely beating...)
3:TG16
4:Genesis

[termis]

Personally, I believe that if you limited the library to HuCard only, the PCE can't compete all that well compared to the SNES/Genesis.    Throw in the CD system though, then the story completely changes.  Anyway, as for the technical dept -

Graphics wise, I must say that Neo Geo>SNES>Genesis>=PCE.  Neo Geo was in a different class altogether, so I'll leave that one out.  SNES next simply because it had a larger color palette and can display more at once, so I found most games to be more vibrant and colorful, though some seemed to over do it.  Genesis did some incredible things with what it could (i.e. Thunder Force IV), and although the PCE could display more colors on-screen at once, it didn't have a large pool of colors to choose from in the first place, so it never looked good as the SNES IMO.

I think the music was really a toss-up between what you preferred.  SNES supposedly had the technical edge of the three (minus CD systems of course), but too many games had that "orchestrated-sound" to me, even when it wasn't so appropriate.  Throw in the CD system, and to this very day, I can't think of a system with better red-book audio than the TCD.

All that said, it really came down to the games, and in this case, I think all 3 are/were worth something, and you'd missing out on some gems on way or another if you didn't own all three.  I've always been a Sega guy as they make the most killer games, but the only 16-bit *era* system that still takes space in my livingroom right now is the PCE Duo.

[PCEngineHell]

I think nat is off spec slightly. The color pallette on the Snes is around 32,000 with 256 being displayed at once on average. Supposedly more could be displayed but to the extreme displeasure of the hardware and memory available so this wasnt bragged about by Nintendo. They typically stuck to the 256 colors at once on screen tout for their hardware ability. As I was told back when TTI was still around (this could be wrong) was that the TG 16/Pc Engines 2 video processors in conjunction can do between 482-512 colors onscreen and the total pallette was programable and not set in complete stone like the Snes 15-bit color pallette was.

Tech things aside there is some awesome titles whos graphics cant be beat for all 3 of the systems depending on the genre. Prob get stabbed here for this but "graphically" the RPGS for Snes were better,possibly because of the Mode 7 used and because sprites didnt have to be moved around so fast. Platformers and action games were done typically well on the Genesis. Arcade game ports,and shooters were pretty much tops on Pc Engine. other systems did them well,but the Pc Engines hardware seemed to handle arcade titles better overall graphically,INCLUDING the NeoGeo ports. Depending on your flavor of how you like your rpgs to look you may actually perfer the Tg/PC Engines graphics more. There was more cinema used on average to display the story better,and sometimes better character sprites all around.
General examples of good looking games that played well are the NeoGeo ports,Street Fighter 2 Dash,Gradius 1 and 2,Salamander,Raiden,R-Type,HellFire,Exile,Ys1-4,Shinobi,Outrun,Afterburner 2,Bomberman 93-94,Ninja Spirit,Splatterhouse,Aero Blasters,Batman,Bonk 1-3,Air Zonk,Vasteel,Buster Bros,Splash Lake,and Operation Wolf.

There are hundreds of others,those are to just name  a offhand.
http://www.pcecp.com/index.php?mode=home
Thats a good site to sign up on and go looking around for screen shots of games.

[Seldane]

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. 

/sdoubletroublee00001ym9.png
/sdoubletroublee00002kq3.png

SNES is the only one of these systems that can compare to the Saturn and other 32 bit systems.

[RuninRuder]

While there are plenty of quality HuCard titles out there, if you really want to experience the best that the PC Engine has to offer, you'll need to have access to the CD games, and you'll need to be willing to spend a lot of money.  That's just the way it is. 

Like Rolins noted, how strong the system will seem compared to its peers will depend heavily on what types of games you're into.  For shooters and action-RPGs, the Duo can't be beaten.  It also hosts a strong library of hack-and-slash sidescrollers, dungeon crawlers, and traditional-style RPGs (though most of the latter are in Japanese).  Not to be forgotten is a decent selection of fighting, puzzle, strategy, platforming, and digital-comic games. 

On the other hand, if you're looking for Contra-style run-and-gunners, Final-Fight-style brawlers, or Genesis-quality sports games, the Duo may not be for you. 

Being a fan of shooters, RPGs, and hack-and-slashers, I love the Duo and rank it above all other systems of its (or any other) generation.  Like GUTS said, the Genesis is right up there with it.  The SNES I could live without if not for a scant few action-platformers.  A lot of people love the Super Nintendo's RPGs, but I think they stink compared to the PC Engine's elite adventure games. 

[Keranu]

Oh boy, another Turbo vs Genesis vs SNES thread; I guess these are inevitable.

Rolins and runin sumed it up well; it all depends what kind of games you are into. However I would argue and say that the Turbo even has some decent sport games, better than the others in my opinion since they aren't typical crap licensed games. Unfortunately the sport genre is pretty limited though, mainly baseball and soccer games.

[RuninRuder]

However I would argue and say that the Turbo even has some decent sport games, better than the others in my opinion since they aren't typical crap licensed games.

Personally, I agree with you on this.  Most people seem to prefer the styles of sports games that were prominent on the Genesis, however.

[PCEngineHell]

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. 

/sdoubletroublee00001ym9.png
/sdoubletroublee00002kq3.png

SNES is the only one of these systems that can compare to the Saturn and other 32 bit systems.

I honestly wasnt impressed with the cg graphics of Donkey Kong Country 1-3. The backgrounds were full of prerendered stiffness and playability was limited to slapping a few enemies,riding in a mine cart,swimming for a few mins,listening to gramps complain,and riding a rail worse then Sonic in the barrel leap areas. Varity of enemies was small over all. All the pre rendered CG was digitized aka Mortal Kombat so there wasnt much work involved outside of the actual rendering on the cg systems. Not impressive unless all you do is stare at your games.

If all you want to do is look at pretty pictures of the jungle then I suggest you stop playing video games and head out to your nearest news stand for a copy of this months Zoo Books or National Geographic.
 Other systems could have done similar things more likely then not,if not better depending on how much ram was dedicated towards storing the pre rendered CG junk. But hey,if we hold true to what you have said then that doesnt explain why arcade ports sucked on Snes and the Pc Engine tended to bitchslap the Snes around on the Neo Geo ports with larger more colorful sprites and better audio and control. There isnt a single fighting game on Snes that can beat any of the NeoGeo Pc Engine ports in quality or exactness. Same for shooters. Gradius 2 easily stomps Gradius 3 on Snes for one. The comparisons could go on and on,but there is no point. The 16-bit graphics wars are over.

[VestCunt]

It's hard to compare the systems because the PCE was fully supported from 87-94.  The SNES didn't even come to the US until 92.  I'm not going to talk about the Neo Geo and Genesis because I'm not as familiar with them.

Try to decide pretty quick if you're going to go all the way for a CD system.  If you don't buy a CD setup, you're not going to have many options as far as driving, vs. fighting, RPGs and sports games.  There are plenty of CD fighters and RPGs but many of the RPGs that were released in English are rare and expensive.  No matter what your setup, remember that there are no FPS (besides Faceball). 

Without the CD games the graphics range from crummy, early-NES caliber visuals like World Court Tennis to a beautiful port of SF2.  Early hucards are basically 8-bit style games with improved graphics and nice touches.

I hate SNES slowdown and RPGs, but the SNES has the best graphics, flying/racing games, no load time and decent sound for a non-CD console.

After I sold my original TG16, I don't think I would have purchased another NEC console if it hadn't been for the CD games.

[Seldane]

How come everybody's comparing ports all the time? They're ports! Ignore them and focus on the original titles.

And yeah, the Donkey Kong Country games suck, they only feature the standard platformer elements including some new ones. They suck as much as Super Mario 64 which only featured the standard platformer elements including some new ones. All platformers suck. At least as long as they're on a Nintendo system. All PCE platformers rule, even though they only feature the standard platformer elements.

[VestCunt]

To clarify, I think the PCE had some incredible graphic potential, but it was too little too late.  If you put every PCE game from Super Volleyball-to-Sapphire in a blender and compared the slush to a smoothie made from the SNES library, the SNES smoothie would look better.

[PCEngineHell]

Well,to clarify on 2 points,1,one of the best reasons to get a Pc-Engine is for all the arcade "PORTS",and 2, for all the hoopla of the Snes graphics your talking up Ive seen Pc Engine titles that beat the Snes counterparts hands down. For that matter there are TONS of pretty looking games on Snes that play like ass. Id easly take the entire Pc Engine library over the Snes/S. Famicom library any day of the week.

[Seldane]

Mario sucks. Everybody knows that. That's why it's such a massive flop worldwide. The graphics are horrible, too. This could've easily been made on the Atari 2600 and it would've looked a lot better too, because SNES sucks. Always.

[Keranu]

Pfft, Yoshi's Island looks like an Odyssey II game at best.

[CrackTiger]

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. 
/sdoubletroublee00002kq3.png
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.

[PCEngineHell]

Pfft, Yoshi's Island looks like an Odyssey II game at best.

I was thinking more along the lines of that old 2 ton computer that ran Space War.

[PCEngineHell]

While I know 2 of those titles for Pc-Engine are Rayxanber III and Forgotten Worlds, what are the other 2? They look familiar but I am not sure exactly.

[CrackTiger]

While I know 2 of those titles for Pc-Engine are Rayxanber III and Forgotten Worlds, what are the other 2? They look familiar but I am not sure exactly.

Kabukiden and Legend Of Xanadu II.

[PCEngineHell]

Ahh ok,Legend Of Xanadu II,now I remember that one. A friend of mine had it a couple of years back.

[Keranu]

Haha, this image really struck me as weird when I first saw it playing Kabuki Den. It totally doesn't fit in graphically with the style of the game and really sticks out, but looks so cool.

On a side note, I noticed you labeled your images as pp1.gif - pp4.gif . Just curious, what does the pp mean?

[guyjin]

I remember renting Donkey kong country way back when - it was graphically impressive at first, but I soon realized that it was the SNES equivalent of the FMV garbage that was so prevalent on the Sega CD; pretty, but too linear to be a real game.

[ParanoiaDragon]

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.

Exactly!  I don't even listen to the radio, but there's plenty of popular crap that other love, & I can't figure out why? 

Anyways, the main 3 have their strengths & weaknesses.  But, the Turbo for me, has the most excellent games!  The Turbo, since it's the oldest, also has the widest range between great graphics & crap graphics.  The Genesis has some of that too.

[TR0N]

Graphically, i would vote:
1] NeoGeo
2] Snes
3] PC Engine
4] Genesis

Agreed.

[CrackTiger]

Haha, this image really struck me as weird when I first saw it playing Kabuki Den. It totally doesn't fit in graphically with the style of the game and really sticks out, but looks so cool.

On a side note, I noticed you labeled your images as pp1.gif - pp4.gif . Just curious, what does the pp mean?

"P" is the right most letter on my keyboard, I type with my right hand and I was pretty sure I didn't have any images named "pp" on my webspace.  

[Keranu]

Ahh makes sense. Do you use the mouse left handed?

[PCEngineHell]

Graphically, i would vote:
1] NeoGeo
2] Snes
3] PC Engine
4] Genesis

Agreed.

You cant take Trons word seriously. He stumbled here by accident looking for Super Nintendo and NeoGeo roms for his Pentium 2 computer and he didnt learn how to use the red and white X on the upper right hand corner to close out the page. He also forgot how to use the address bar,so basically hes stuck here commenting on things he doesn't know about
This is why he ranks so low in our fight club tally. Hes practically been kidnapped here from the Neo-Geo forums.

[CrackTiger]

Ahh makes sense. Do you use the mouse left handed?

No, but that's an awesome idea. 

[GUTS]

Why the fuck do poeple think Donkey Kong Country is some graphical marvel?  It looks like SHIT, the only thing it does is put a ton of colors on screen at once, that's IT.  There isn't anything technically impressive about it; there are barely any sprites on screen at once, the bosses are small, the art is HORRIBLE, and it plays like shit.  Yoshi's Island looks a billion times better  and has about the best graphics the SNES can offer thanks to the FX chip. The SNES could do some nice graphics here and there, but DKC has aged almost as badly as shit like X-Perts.

[grahf]

I dont think DKC has aged that badly graphically. While most of the game is rather plain, there is some very nice scenery on some levels. Gameplay wise, it always was mediocre. People just bought it because it was pretty.

Street Fighter Zero/Alpha 2 on the other hand, that game is still pretty f'in impressive. Also, Tengai Makyou Zero has some beautiful areas.

[TurboXray]

Oh man, not this type of thread again

 The reason lot of the SNES games (especially later ones) hold up so well is the beautiful 15bit palette and transparency layer. The scaling doesn't hold well though. The SFX  and C4 chip was Nintendo's workaround fix for the slow CPU in the original design ( most game didn't run at 3.58mhz fastrom but used the 2.78mhz mode  - slowrom ). I think the SNES had a good amount of high production games thanks to Nintendo's strict standards/policy. The PCE DUO had some great high quality production games too, although kept in Japan. A fair amount of Genesis games don't hold up so well ( drab color and all ), though some still do like Sonic 2 and Gunstar heroes ( Sonic CD looks like ass ).

[GUTS]

HAHA yeah Nintendo had some really strict standards, I'll remember that next time I see piles of Hyperzone and Bill Laimbeer's Combat Basketball at the used game store.

[Keranu]

I still think DKC looks nice these days, though I admit the graphic style is terribly outdated. I think it's kind of stupid for people to say the graphics suck because the backgrounds are static though because tons of other platformers have static backgrounds. At least DKC made pretty static backgrounds!

A game doesn't have to be "technically impressive" to have nice graphics. Hell, there are a lot of games that aren't as technically impressive as others but have much better graphics in my opinion which to me gives it overall better presentation. An example of this to me is Lightening Force. People rave about this game's graphics because of it's technical features, like lots of parallax scrolling layers, but in my opinion the layers look ass ugly. Take for example the level with all the cloud layers. The layers don't shape out the clouds, instead they are just flat, boxy clouds which makes it look like fat, grey lines going across the screen rather than actual clouds. Not to mention I found the colors to be dirty and the artwork to be mediocre at best. So in a case like this, I would say a game like (and I know this is a weird example to use) Cadash for TG16 has better graphics because the art is nicer.

[PCEngineHell]

HAHA yeah Nintendo had some really strict standards, I'll remember that next time I see piles of Hyperzone and Bill Laimbeer's Combat Basketball at the used game store.

Shit man dont forget Street Combat,Barkleys Shut up and Jam,Shaq Fu,The Rocketeer,about any other THQ game, and Mortal Kombat 1. All those were top notch and known for their awesome game play and quality. Any true Snerd knows this.

[Joe Redifer]

Those DKC screenshots posted only have 109 and 135 colors in them.  That means the SNES sucks and everyone hates it.

Also, why post an arcade screenshot for Forgotten Worlds?  The Turbo version is lower resolution than that horizontally (most Capcom arcades of that era were 352 or 336 pixels across).  The Turbo version likely runs at a mere 256 pixels across, like DKC.

[Tatsujin]

if you want to get a lot of EXCLUSIVE and splendid action games with a lot of enemies on screen, a proper dynamic gameplay, even draw in a pretty nice palette and supported with some of the best BGMs in game history, then go 4 it

[TurboXray]

Also, why post an arcade screenshot for Forgotten Worlds?  The Turbo version is lower resolution than that horizontally (most Capcom arcades of that era were 352 or 336 pixels across).  The Turbo version likely runs at a mere 256 pixels across, like DKC.

Nope, Forgotten Worlds SCD runs in 342 pixel mode. That's part of the reason for the flicker.

 To GUTS and Michael: That's right, mention the shit games in response. That totally defeats my statement .  Idiots.

[Emerald Rocker]

Actually, it does defeat your statement.  Since a bunch of crap games came out, it looks like Nintendo's standards weren't really all that strict.

[CrackTiger]

Why the fuck do poeple think Donkey Kong Country is some graphical marvel?  It looks like SHIT, the only thing it does is put a ton of colors on screen at once, that's IT.  There isn't anything technically impressive about it; there are barely any sprites on screen at once, the bosses are small, the art is HORRIBLE, and it plays like shit.  Yoshi's Island looks a billion times better  and has about the best graphics the SNES can offer thanks to the FX chip. The SNES could do some nice graphics here and there, but DKC has aged almost as badly as shit like X-Perts.

I don't know if the layers of snow count as sprites or not, but there seemed to be a lot going on during those levels. Plus, aren't there times when the screen is full of bananas? I haven't really played it since it came out, so my memory of the overall game is a little blurry.

I don't think it's total garbage(except for the art & character design) or anything. It just reminds me of those generic Genesis platformers.

Speaking of Genesis, I tried Comix Zone for the first time on the Genesis Coll. PS2 the other day. I was surprised to find the exactly same effect as DKC at the title screen with a similar looking layout.

I still think DKC looks nice these days, though I admit the graphic style is terribly outdated. I think it's kind of stupid for people to say the graphics suck because the backgrounds are static though because tons of other platformers have static backgrounds. At least DKC made pretty static backgrounds!

A game doesn't have to be "technically impressive" to have nice graphics. Hell, there are a lot of games that aren't as technically impressive as others but have much better graphics in my opinion which to me gives it overall better presentation. An example of this to me is Lightening Force. People rave about this game's graphics because of it's technical features, like lots of parallax scrolling layers, but in my opinion the layers look ass ugly. Take for example the level with all the cloud layers. The layers don't shape out the clouds, instead they are just flat, boxy clouds which makes it look like fat, grey lines going across the screen rather than actual clouds. Not to mention I found the colors to be dirty and the artwork to be mediocre at best. So in a case like this, I would say a game like (and I know this is a weird example to use) Cadash for TG16 has better graphics because the art is nicer.

Maybe I'm also remembering the DKC sequals, but I thought that some stages actually had a bunch of layers of bg's with the occasiional effect thrown in.

But as I've said before, scrolling bg's/parallax/whatever doesn't make good graphics, it only complements good graphics when it's needed and can make games look worse when it's used just for the sake of having it.

The PC Engine is the best example of this. Too many developers were too lazy to program in scrolling bg's in many of the better looking PCE games, but most people think that they look awesome.

Just the same, large or lots of sprites don't equal nice graphics either. Too many 16-bit games were busted from using retard sized character sprites.

[PCEngineHell]

Plus, aren't there times when the screen is full of bananas?

I don't think it's total garbage(except for the art & character design) or anything. It just reminds me of those generic Genesis platformers.

Even in the worst days of Genesis I dont remember the technical highlight being a screen full of bananas.....

Lets face it DKC 1,2 and 3 are garbage.

[CrackTiger]

Those DKC screenshots posted only have 109 and 135 colors in them.  That means the SNES sucks and everyone hates it.

Also, why post an arcade screenshot for Forgotten Worlds?  The Turbo version is lower resolution than that horizontally (most Capcom arcades of that era were 352 or 336 pixels across).  The Turbo version likely runs at a mere 256 pixels across, like DKC.

That's all PC Engine baby!

Side Arms also uses the 336 horizontal resolution and Tenchi O Kurau/Dynasty Wars appears to actually run in a 352 pixel mode. All three games were ported by NEC Ave, who get a bad rap around here for making games with 'crappy' graphics. They also did a great port of Ckiki Chiki Boys, although it only runs in '256 mode.

This being a "how does the PC Engine compare?" thread, I also included a screenshot from the Genesis version of Forgotten Worlds. If for no other reason than it was considered for years to be much more arcade perfect visually than the PCE version. It's still a good game, but like the other early Capcom arcade games on Genesis, it's an original version and not a real port graphically.

Plus, aren't there times when the screen is full of bananas?

I don't think it's total garbage(except for the art & character design) or anything. It just reminds me of those generic Genesis platformers.

Even in the worst days of Genesis I dont remember the technical highlight being a screen full of bananas.....

Lets face it DKC 1,2 and 3 are garbage.

Yeah, but it's still not "barely any sprites on screen at once".

[PCEngineHell]

To GUTS and Michael: That's right, mention the shit games in response. That totally defeats my statement .  Idiots.

Sorry but something you must have not realized was that Nintendo didnt have Quality Control,it had Licensing Control
and if you were willing to pay the higher then SEGA licensing fee to get you game released you could release anything on the Snes or any other Nintendo system,and THQ and Acclaim have stepped up to prove that 100 percent over the years. The games Gutts and me named maybe make up 3 percent of the shit titles released,there were many many others just as bad if not worse.

[PCEngineHell]

I was thinking Ninja Spirit or Legend of Hero Tomo also used a special res. Im prob wrong,was just thinking it did.

I never liked the Genesis port of Forgotten Worlds. It stuck out like a sore thumb as a bad port graphically. They should have given it more megs and more programming time.

[CrackTiger]

I was thinking Ninja Spirit or Legend of Hero Tomo also used a special res. Im prob wrong,was just thinking it did.

Yeah, all the Irem arcade ports on PCE use the 336 res mode, even though I'm pretty sure R-Type was ported by Hudson. There are tons of other games as well, but yeah most PCE/Turbo games run in the 256 res mode. But there's nothing wrong with that.

[Joe Redifer]

You win this round in the resolution battle, CrackTiger... but where is the Genesis version of Chiki Boys or whatever that game is called?  It runs in the high definition resolution of 320 pixels whereas the PC Engine version struggles to put a mere 256 pixels onscreen, at least I think it does.  HAHAHAHHAHAHHA!  Too bad the game is crap in any incarnation.