The only thing Sega contributed and started a legacy of was the idea of console wars and pledging loyalty to your favorite brand and trashing the opposition. That I will give them credit for, it's been a long lasting tradition ever since. Other than that I can't think of any major contributions from them

The ironic thing is all you’ve contributed to this thread is ridiculously childish system warring. This thread is not about you. Some of us are interested in the discussion. Stop derailing.

SEGA's biggest problem was while they were highly innovative in ideas they never calculated them well. Take the SEGA Activator. It was Kinect essentially in the early 90s. It was just tossed out in the market tho. Same with SEGA Nomad. Nintendo was and is more conservative and calculated. They prepare more before introducing a new hardware concept. Now that innovative SEGA spirit worked great in software but home hardware it was any idea they had went to market and that hurt them financially. SEGA was bad at managing its finances and balancing products on the market. Nintendo failed with Virtual Boy but had Gameboy to fall back on.

SEGA/Nintendo were evenly matched in innovation and creative talents. One had Myamoto who helped revolutionize some console games. The other had Yu Suzuki who helped revolutionize arcade games. Nintendo's big advantage was management. SEGA was never run well on the business side where Nintendo always has been. Genesis and SNES were neck and neck but SEGA undid itself with dumb business decisions. SOA and SOJ never communicated well. They fought constantly. That wasn't the case at Nintendo. Nintendo's other advantage is its games are more polished as a general rule. Not that SEGA games couldn't be as polished as many were but also many were not as they released far more new IPs than Nintendo did and that's not a praise or a knock. Just how it was.  If we want to compare unrelated games. I will take Ranger X over Yoshi's Island any day and holy shit that game does visual effects gaming was not ready to do yet. Lighting effects and 3D depth of field effects without using polygons.

If you want games that are more directly comparable. Shining Force and Fire Emblem. Final Fantasy vs Phantasy Star and PSIV is a fucking amazing game but so are FF games on SNES. Zelda LTTP vs Crusader of Centry or Landstalker. Final Fight vs Streets of Rage.  Genesis had Mortal Kombat with blood while SNES was sweat. Contra III vs Contra Hard Corps. Castlevania IV vs Bloodlines. Even when those 2 got the same series they were so very different. Unless it was Ys III and Genesis Ys III is much better than the SNES version tho the TG16 CD version was best.

I can relate; Wii was my favourite system of the 7th generation as well, which did mean I had to put up with all manner of elitist losers acting like being a Wii owner meant you were inferior to the "glorious PS360 master race."

Ultimately though, it's their loss; I got to enjoy great games on my Wii that they missed out on cos they were too immature to put aside childish console wars. In the end, if you played what you wanted and enjoyed it, then you're smarter than they were, and better off.

SEGA's biggest problem was while they were highly innovative in ideas they never calculated them well. Take the SEGA Activator. It was Kinect essentially in the early 90s. It was just tossed out in the market tho. Same with SEGA Nomad. Nintendo was and is more conservative and calculated. They prepare more before introducing a new hardware concept. Now that innovative SEGA spirit worked great in software but home hardware it was any idea they had went to market and that hurt them financially. SEGA was bad at managing its finances and balancing products on the market. Nintendo failed with Virtual Boy but had Gameboy to fall back on.

SEGA/Nintendo were evenly matched in innovation and creative talents. One had Myamoto who helped revolutionize some console games. The other had Yu Suzuki who helped revolutionize arcade games. Nintendo's big advantage was management. SEGA was never run well on the business side where Nintendo always has been. Genesis and SNES were neck and neck but SEGA undid itself with dumb business decisions. SOA and SOJ never communicated well. They fought constantly. That wasn't the case at Nintendo. Nintendo's other advantage is its games are more polished as a general rule. Not that SEGA games couldn't be as polished as many were but also many were not as they released far more new IPs than Nintendo did and that's not a praise or a knock. Just how it was.  If we want to compare unrelated games. I will take Ranger X over Yoshi's Island any day and holy shit that game does visual effects gaming was not ready to do yet. Lighting effects and 3D depth of field effects without using polygons.

If you want games that are more directly comparable. Shining Force and Fire Emblem. Final Fantasy vs Phantasy Star and PSIV is a fucking amazing game but so are FF games on SNES. Zelda LTTP vs Crusader of Centry or Landstalker. Final Fight vs Streets of Rage.  Genesis had Mortal Kombat with blood while SNES was sweat. Contra III vs Contra Hard Corps. Castlevania IV vs Bloodlines. Even when those 2 got the same series they were so very different. Unless it was Ys III and Genesis Ys III is much better than the SNES version tho the TG16 CD version was best.

How do you know they missed out on anything? That's subjective too. Gamers tend to be well aware of what is available on other systems, sometimes they just don't care for those things.