By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HylianSwordsman on 23 July 2019
Edit Thread
Shadow1980 said:
HylianSwordsman said:

And how long have we been hearing the higher ups at Nintendo, especially Iwata, say that "software sells hardware"? SNES won its gen not because it was the superior hardware, but because it had Super Mario World, Donkey Kong Country, A Link to the Past, and Super Metroid, amongst others.

Well, technically the SNES was the better overall system in terms of hardware as well. While its processor wasn't as fast, in every other metric the SNES outclassed the Genesis. It had more RAM, arguably better sound, could display more sprites, could display more colors on-screen, and had a vastly larger color pallet.

Also, the SNES won primarily because of Japan. The Mega Drive flopped there, coming in third place behind the PC Engine (or TurboGrafx-16, as we know it in the West). In the U.S., the SNES did eventually secure a relatively narrow win, but the limited data we have suggests the Genesis was the top system in 1993 and 1994, and only fell behind after 1995 due to the SNES having better legs. In Europe, the Mega Drive supposedly outsold the SNES by a comfortable margin.

Again, not the point. It doesn't matter whose hardware is best, it matters why they did with their hardware what they did, and what it means to the brand. With Nintendo, hardware follows software. Back in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th generations, diminishing returns had not even begun to set in, each generation felt leaps and bounds beyond the last. This meant that there was a strong incentive from a software perspective for Nintendo to invest in better hardware. This isn't about who won, but what their philosophy was in trying to win.

Last edited by HylianSwordsman - on 23 July 2019