Why was the Genesis so weak compared to the SNES?

Because it came out in 1988, a few years before the SNES.

It could still keep up. You can't tell me you preferred Mortal Kombat on SNES.

Damn, cant find my new sega console anywhere!

Attached: ebay07.jpg (2000x1335, 2.71M)

youtu.be/yGzgKCsrNHM

Pff

Attached: sega.jpg (298x169, 7K)

It was two years older. Now the real interesting thing is what could have happened if nintendo had never considered trying for backwards compatibility and instead gave the snes a not shit processor.

Attached: 1545113231986.jpg (612x468, 337K)

Why did Nitendo just so completely collapse during the SNES era
The words "Baby Mario" never should have left anyone's brain. It was only a matter of time until someone crushed them if you do that for a flagship title

Attached: wtf.jpg (800x552, 94K)

.

Attached: 91UckD8VqfL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (1500x1125, 166K)

>soul
>soulless

It actually had a stronger cpu than the snes, but a worse video processor.

GEEEEENISIS DOES

Attached: 1380236207451.jpg (347x291, 30K)

>Three buttons to play fighting games

>Genesis
>weak
>when comparison shows it needs to sitck with inferior SNES resolutions or else lazy devs would need to redraw assets

The MD was objectively more powerful. Higher resolutions AND a higher CPU speed.

The only thing the SNES did better was sprite rotation, scaling and MODE 7.

The sound that will never leave your brain
youtube.com/watch?v=3qkrKTAOv2M

>sprite rotation, scaling and MODE 7.

SNES has no sprite rotation nor scaling. And MODE 7 isn't what you probably think it is.

Learn to read morons, he said "didn't need to rely" and you didn't need to rely on any of this

It also didn't help that World1 was already a huge step down from Bros3.

>implying mode 7 doesn't allow for background scaling

Imagine being such a faggot that you have to pretend one of the best games on the snes is bad.

Yes, and sprites are not backgrounds, otherwise they'd be called backgrounds, and not sprites.

SNES MODE 7 is just rotation and scaling of background layers, not the sprites. It could not do scale/rotation of sprites natively but it was easily achievable by using any DPS chip, which just about every remarkable game had one.

By comparison, the only way the Mega Drive could do ANY rotation or scaling was with a MegaCD attached.

t. Brazilfag that loves his MegaDrive but acknowledges the SNES had good points too

Attached: __sega_dreamcast_sega_mega_drive_and_sega_saturn_sega_hard_girls_drawn_by_komedaisuki__3c3e01e7e3f68 (600x542, 363K)

Because it was like 2 years older?

Because it came out two years before the SNES at a time when computers were seeing exponential growth every year over previous models.

>the only way the Mega Drive could do ANY rotation or scaling was with a MegaCD attached.
Looks like somebody hasn't played alien soldier or watched any demos.

It's not bad but it is embarrassing.
People of all ages loved Mario. Why did they have to make buying a new Mario game cringy by putting a giant baby on it?
Crash came out one year later- the rest is history

The genesis is 2 years older so I think ports suffer because of that. It has some beautiful exclusive games though.

All of those operations are just maths, of course it can do them. The issue is that it's extremely inefficient and you can't really have much of anything else happening at the same time.

The same way you can draw poligons and vectors in a SNES to make a 3D image, you can't actually make a real game because there isn't enough power to process much of anything else.