RetroWars: Sega vs Nintendo

[Neon Ignition]

SEGA vs NINTENDO

Starting a new occasional run of threads, we're taking it back to the playground in a much more broader speaking discussion. In each RetroWar we'll pit two titans of rivalry against one another as many school kids would do back in the day, weighing up the strengths and weaknesses of each side, arguing in favour of your childhood 'top dog' and sharing your modern day hindsight view on who truly was the greatest.

Just as conversation has often gone on at length about Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo - so did it too about the gaming giants of old that are mostly no longer around in their past form. We begin at the most apt of childhood rivalries...


SEGA
The blue skies console maker was the playground king to many during its golden heyday of the Master System and the Mega Drive. Leaning hard on its arcade heritage and its attempts at key headlining software that would result in series such as Sonic with its blast processing, Sega led its charge with a more edgy image to its rivals that encapsulated the 90's style. Self-proclaimingly doing what Ninten-don't, Sega vied for top position using its arcade hardware know-how to hound its rival until thing's began to get away from them following the failure of add-on hardware releases and the blindsiding Sony gave them. The quality of their software, particularly as discussion moves further into the 3D era, will always be a go-to for any ardent Sega fanatic, the company delivering a consistent slate of arcade treats proving that to be this good took AGES.





NINTENDO
The red capped company has long proven itself with timeless home console targeted software. Taking a softer, more family friendly image than its rivals has been its bread and butter for a long time with only occasional hardware misfires spoiling its track record. It was always a stubbornly determined company, proud to protect its bottom line whilst still leading with innovation in its software. The same company that successfully fought of multiple opponents with an outdated black and white handheld also dropped some of the most iconic titles of all time, albeit less frequently than many would have preferred. For many gamers, Nintendo has defined many of their childhood memories.




THE DEBATE
This is very much open ended. A good leading point is to cast your vote then tell us why your chosen option was just that, but beyond that there's a lot to break the subject down into:

-What made Sega/Nintendo the better one?
-Was Sonic/Mario the best mascot choice and which was best?
-Which console was the better in each generation?
-Did you once think Sega would still be in hardware or Nintendo wouldn't still be?

Defend your Favourite - Defeat your Rivals

[Asura]

-What made Sega/Nintendo the better one?
-Was Sonic/Mario the best mascot choice and which was best?
-Which console was the better in each generation?
-Did you once think Sega would still be in hardware or Nintendo wouldn't still be?

I grew up with a Megadrive. As I was in school, it was a big part of my childhood; everyone had the same console because then you could swap games. I only remember one kid having a SNES, who also had a Game Boy, and was a big Nintendo fan... Oh and that one kid who owned a NeoGeo that everyone thought was a lie, until he had a birthday party that year and you found out his dad worked in oil and visited his house only to see it was a half-mansion and you later understood what social class was all about...

... Anyway...

-What made Sega/Nintendo the better one?

I grew up around two major gaming fields; Sega at home, and Sega/SNK/Capcom at the arcades.

I got a Game Gear for my 9th birthday, which was the first gaming system I ever owned (previously we had computers which were for work, but obviously played games as well), and that pretty much sealed it. I would later get a Megadrive like my friends, then a Saturn, and didn't get a Nintendo console until the N64 not long after release.

As a kid, if you had asked me, I would've definitely said I loved Sega and strongly disliked Nintendo. I was a complete fanboy (then again, I was 10 years old). It was all about Sonic; Mario was laaaaaame. I got over all that by the time I was about 11, when the PS1 was on the horizon. I still picked the Saturn because I thought Sega's gaming pedigree would pan out, but I didn't rubbish the PS1 just because it was the rival machine.

I used to like Sega's branding and identity - the more "edgy" feel they fostered. That being said, I don't know how much of this was real and how much of it was just me, an impressionable kid, being taken in my marketing.

-Which console was the better in each generation?

The Megadrive had plenty of fast, arcadey titles that appealed to me. Strong outliers were Aladdin, Streets of Rage 1&2, Turtles (the scrolling fighter; I forget which one is the MD one), Street Fighter II SCE... I even had Ecco, which was a bit more cerebral, and Bubsy which was... A game. Oh also I had Populous 2, GODS, Test Drive II, Italia '90 and Buster Douglas Boxing - plus later I had Sonic 3. Pretty sure that was it.

There were only five SNES games of which I was jealous: StarWing, Super Star Wars/Empire/Jedi, and Jurassic Park (the overhead one). The latter one confuses me, too. For some reason I really wanted that game (I think it was the FPS segments).

In a way, I think this is why the SNES has aged a bit better than the MD. RPGs and adventure games with nice, sprite-based graphics are a bit timeless. Games like the PS1 Saga Frontier II and Alundra (the first one) still look good as they ever did, but I think arcade titles (especially arcade racers) age faster than any other genre of game. Daytona appeals to me, but I can see why to most people it's just a garish, blocky mess with awful music.

This makes me reflect on formative experiences. I didn't play a proper RPG until Final Fantasy VII on PC, years later. I have wondered, in the past, if RPGs were more prevalent in the UK (like it seems they were in the US) if I would've gotten into Nintendo more. As a kid, I had a bunch of hobbies - videogames, karate, but also reading. I loved fantasy books and reading epic stories like Shannara, and I suspect I would've really gotten into RPGs had they been available to me.

-Was Sonic/Mario the best mascot choice and which was best?

However, I loved Sonic The Hedgehog. I make no excuses for this. I had all the books, I read the comic, I watched the TV shows; though I only had Sonic 3 and Sonic Triple Trouble for the Game Gear (though naturally I played 1/2/Knuckles/Chaos at friends' houses and the like).

I hated the Mario games too, because what I perceived to be their boring visuals and slower pace - and although I've played some of them since, I would still prefer to fire up Sonic 3 to any of them right now, though a large part of that is familiarity and nostalgia talking.

-Did you once think Sega would still be in hardware or Nintendo wouldn't still be?

Back in the 90s, I definitely expected Sega to persist. They just seemed like such a big brand. I think when the Saturn faltered, I wondered what might happen, but I still expected them to bounce back. It wasn't until the Dreamcast died that I accepted they'd run that particular race to the finish.

That being said, I never expected Nintendo to go bust either. Even as a kid, a fanboy kid, I was able to see the Game Boy and such for what they were; extremely well-made bits of hardware with their own superb games. I never thought of the console war as something one side could "win" or "lose".

To round this up, Sega are a difficult company of which to be a fan. They've made some great things, interspersed with monumental ****-ups that have gone on for years (the current contract with AtGames for their retro hardware is a perfect example). They also have the same problem I have with Square-Enix these days; I keep getting emails saying "Check out these Sega games!" and the newsletter is filled with Total War news... I mean, fine, but that'll never feel like a "Sega" game to me.

However, they're also a product of the 80s and 90s. I feel that Nintendo have moved with the times but managed to preserve their identity, but Sega's has drifted. Sometimes they publish the likes of Sonic Mania and there's a brief flash of it, but I can't help but feel the spark is gone.

[Dogg Thang]

Just before this kicks off, I would just like to say that I love you all.

And the Amiga was better than the Atari ST. Wait, that wasn't the question? Okay I need to think seriously about my response because my view is tainted by nostalgia which is very Sega-skewed. And really up until Sega were out of the hardware market, it always was and it still is in the sense that I will dig out my Saturn and Dreamcast on a semi regular basis but never my N64 or Gamecube. And yet since Sega have been gone, it is Nintendo all the way for me and their handhelds have really been my primary gaming life since the GBA. So I don't have an answer yet but I have some thinking to do.

[Nu-Eclipse]

Sega have the superior arcade legacy but Nintendo clearly leave them standing in terms of home and portable gaming.

Depends on one's perspective and/or preference, I guess.

[Mayhem]

The SNES was always better for me during the 16 bit period compared to the MD. Conversely, I still rank the MD incredibly highly overall. It was, in my opinion, almost the best time to be a home videogames player, you chose wisely regardless of whether you fell into camp SNES or camp MD.

[Colin]

I've surprised myself on this front while building the Pi, as I'm only installing games I definitely want to play through. As much as I loved my import MD, I was pretty sure I'd be installing far more SFC games than MD, but it's been completely the other way around. I'd kind of look at the systems from a personal point of view as follows:

Master System over NES

MD and SFC both brilliant

Handhelds, can only be Nintendo really

Saturn over N64, not that I'm a massive fan of either but the Saturn has a much, much better library

And I'd rather a DC than any home system Nintendo have made from the GC onward

So I'm probably more in the SEGA camp, but I'm not arsed about the rivalry, I just buy the systems that interest me game wise. Funnily enough though, Nintendo might as well have quit the hardware arena at the same time as SEGA as far as I'm concerned from looking at what I'm saying above. I'd buy more Nintendo games if I didn't have to buy Nintendo hardware to play them on!

[_SD_]

I would have defended my NES until the very end back in the playground... but after far too many years of reflection, the Master System was probably the better machine. I do wonder if things would have been any different if my mate Adrian had a Sega instead of a NES, and therefore my first proper console gaming experience would have been say, Alex Kidd instead of Mario.

[Nu-Eclipse]

I would have defended my NES until the very end back in the playground... but after far too many years of reflection, the Master System was probably the better machine.

Nah.

The MS was graphically more capable than the NES but there really wasn't that much in it between the two.

NES batters the MS for quality and variety of games, with a lot of that admittedly being down to Nintendo's dominance of the 8-bit market and the ironclad terms that they handed down to third-party devs which meant that third-party support for the MS was mostly poor, leaving Sega to rely on coin-op ports that obviously lacked.

NES still the better 8-bit console by most metrics imo.

[Leon Retro]

It's easy for me to choose the SNES, simply because I used it far more than the Mega Drive. But I definitely have a lot of love for the MD, and truly great memories of playing some of its best games.

The reasons I love the SNES:

Truly brilliant games like Super Mario World, F-Zero, ActRaiser, Super Mario Kart, Castlevania IV, Contra 3, Pilotwings, Star Fox etc...

The sound chip was incredibly good at delivering top quality music. It still surprises how impressive music can sound on the SNES.

Mode 7 really was something special for its time, with games like Pilotwings and F-Zero showing off the tech in style.

Nintendo, Konami, Capcom, RARE, Square etc... were on the top of their game and delivered loads of great games that showed off the machine and made people realise why the SNES was a special piece of kit.

The joypad felt really nice to use - and still does today. It's such a classic design. Little wonder people buy replicas to use with emulation.

Of course, there were bad points to the SNES, such as weak CPU being the most obvious issue. Overall though, it was a machine that people across the world fell in love with. It brought lots of gaming pleasure to millions of people throughout the 90s and onwards. I think it will always be cherished as one of the best consoles ever made by a lot of people. Even future generations might enjoy it.

The Mega Drive has a ton of great games. It's range of top quality shooters - and arcade-style games in general - would make the SNES weep. But at the end of the day, if I had to choose one system, I'd go for the SNES and its best games. I would miss the MD though.

[Leon Retro]

What made Sega/Nintendo the better one?

I think Nintendo were the best of the two during the 8 & 16-bit era. But that's not to say I didn't enjoy Sega, because I had a lot of fun with the Master System and the Mega Drive.

Was Sonic/Mario the best mascot choice and which was best?

I really like Mega Drive Sonic, but went off the character after that era. I'd say Mario is easily the better of the two characters.

Which console was the better in each generation?

I prefer the NES & SNES over the Master System & Mega Drive. I prefer the Saturn over the N64. The GameCube appeals to me a bit more than the Dreamcast.

Did you once think Sega would still be in hardware or Nintendo wouldn't still be?

Not until the Sony became dominant and the Dreamcast didn't seem very popular, did I suspect it was curtains for Sega. Nintendo was always a huge force in gaming across the world, so I never worried about the company. Well, I did a bit with the Wii U shambles, but Nintendo came back strong with the Switch.

[_SD_]

I have often wondered how well the Game Gear would have done if Sega had a sensible moment in pre-production and realised what a silly beast they were creating. If you remove the enormous battery draining cold cathode backlight, you have something that could run on 4AAs and be much smaller overall. I suppose they could have still gone for a non-lit colour display, but the backlighting just killed it.

A smaller, cheaper unit that was more comparable to the Gameboy than the Lynx in both size and battery life was, in retrospect, probably the way to go. It would have made the handheld situation more interesting had there been some proper competition to the king... well, until 150 little monsters came along.

[Zen Monkey]

Nintendo all the way for me. Sega had the cooler looking games, for sure, but, even as a kid, I thought they lacked substance compared to Nintendo games. But cool is more attractive than substance, it shouts louder, it's clearer to see, and I think that's why everyone I knew had Megadrives. But time has proven who made top-notch games and who didn't.

[Team Andromeda]

Master System over the NES

Super Nintendo over the Mega Drive

Saturn over the N64

Dreamcast over the Cube

Mario over Sonic

I 'liked' SEGA more because of their Arcade background and as a result, made the better lightgun games, the better 3D shooters and racers. My views on the 'current' SEGA and Nintendo are they are both as bad as each other: Both Outsource far too much, Both far too reliant on past IP and both don't use the internet to its fullest and where both corps past games are so much better than anything they come up with thesedays, bar the odd magic game ever 3 years or so.

[Leon Retro]

A smaller, cheaper unit that was more comparable to the Gameboy than the Lynx in both size and battery life was, in retrospect, probably the way to go.

Well, the Game Gear is essentially a portable Master System, so it was always going to be a power hog. Nintendo gave people a handheld that ran games that looked very much like what you'd get on the NES, only in monochrome. I don't think Sega would have felt happy offering Master System games in monochrome. It was a strange time, because having colourful handheld games was cool, but the Game Boy design and long battery life ended up appealing to the mass market. I think the designers of the Game Gear and Lynx probably thought they could beat the Game Boy, but Nintendo's machine had a lot of plus points that made it incredibly popular.

[Dogg Thang]

The Game Gear was so impressive back in the day. I was amazed by what it was doing. And it had some fantastic games too. But yeah, the battery issues basically meant it was a home console - you needed a plug socket. The GB was genuinely portable and it had a load of games too. It felt more durable so made sense as a handheld. More sense than the Game Gear.